PROGRAM DIRECTOR SELF-STUDY REPORT
FOR
Submitted by: Dr. Amy Schlieve
1/1/2010

1. MISSION AND DEGREE
1.1
Describe how the program relates to UW-Stout's Mission and Goals.
Introduction and Overview
The University of Wisconsin-Stout (UW-Stout) is a comprehensive, career-focused polytechnic university in Menomonie, Wisconsin, with 7,971 students enrolled in 38 undergraduate and 17 graduate programs. A core value of the institution is applied learning, scientific theory and research to solve real-world problems, grow the state economy and serve society. The tenets of Stout’s polytechnic mission include:

Career Focus: A polytechnic university offers a comprehensive curriculum that prepares graduates for professional careers.

Applied Learning: A polytechnic university blends theory with practice to produce innovative solutions to real world problems.
1

Collaboration: A polytechnic university works closely with business, industry and other educational institutions to benefit students and grow the economy.
UW-Stout Enduring Goals:
1.
Offer high quality, challenging academic programs that influence and respond to a changing society.
2.
Preserve and enhance our educational processes through the application of active learning principles.
3.
Promote excellence in teaching, research, scholarship and service.
4.
Recruit and retain a diverse university population.
5.
Foster a collegial, trusting and tolerant campus climate.
6.
Provide safe, accessible, effective, efficient and inviting physical facilities.
7.
Provide responsive, efficient, and cost-effective educational support programs and services.
The School of Education has adopted the framework developed by Charlotte Danielson,
Excellence in Teaching , which refers to all aspects of the subject concepts, principles, relationships and methods of inquiry. Danielson refers to the use of pedagogical techniques particular to the discipline that assists in conveying information and teaching skills. According to the University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education Conceptual Framework it is the responsibility of the faculty member to teach students to become critical thinkers, reflective practioners and learn how to utilize technology to become competent in their discipline.
The School of Education faculty and staff have established the following enduring unit goals to guide implementation of our conceptual framework and conduct strategic planning:
1.
Provide program curricula that incorporate diversity, research, theory, and best practice.
2.
Align program outcomes with state and national education standards.
Page 1

3.
Foster the development of education professionals who are reflective in their practice.
4.
Collaborate with PK-12 schools, universities, technical colleges, educational agencies, professional associations, and communities to improve teaching and learning.
5.
Advance educational scholarship and research at the university, local, state, national, and
2 international levels.
6.
Recruit, support and retain a diverse faculty/staff.
7.
Recruit, support and retain a diverse candidate body.
8.
Foster a climate of tolerance, trust, and respect. Allow diversity of opinions and beliefs to be heard.
9.
Provide safe, effective, efficient, and inviting SOE facilities.
10.
Engage in leadership and service to the university, local, state, national, and international professional organizations.
11.
Improve efficiencies and cost effectiveness of services and programs.
The mission of the University and the School of Education are clearly reflected in the Special
Education major demonstrated by the preparation of professional educators. Also consistent with the Institution’s mission is addressing the societal need for special educators who can teach across categories of disabilities.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM
In August 2004 the B.S. in Special Education was developed to prepare students for a new crosscategorical certification. Prior to that date, UW-Stout has prepared teachers certified in special education-cognitive disabilities since the early 1970s via a concentration in the B.S.Vocational
Rehabilitation program. UW-Stout’s Special Education program prepares future educators to teach students across categories of disabilities—including learning, cognitive, emotional and behavioral disabilities—from kindergarten through adolescence, approximately ages 5 through
21.
Special education is founded on the philosophy of advocacy for persons with exceptionalities and their families, and of embracing and teaching to individual differences and needs. Therefore, special educators must know the characteristics of the learners they serve, possess the skills to design effective interventions and the dispositions to practice within established standards.
Increasingly, students with disabilities are served in inclusive regular education settings supplemented by support services provided by a special education case manager. Therefore, special education teachers must possess a working knowledge of all general education curriculum subjects and content. Special education teachers work with general education teachers to develop lesson plans, materials and tests; adapt curriculum to be appropriate for each student; and teach specific learning strategies, social skills and study skills. The special education teacher responsibilities also include assessment, developing individual education, behavioral and transition plans, and working with families and other support services. Since its
Page 2

3 inception, the program has continually worked towards establishing and maintaining partnerships with area high schools for field experience, assistance in administering DIBELS (Dynamic
Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills), pre-student teaching and student teaching placements.
Graduates of this program will receive a Wisconsin teaching license (801) in Cross-categorical special education with an emphasis in Cognitive Disabilities. They will possess competencies to assess their students’ vocational readiness, provide a school-to-work curriculum, provide transition services to students with disabilities, and assist families of students with special needs to coordinate with community service providers.
2.1 Curriculum Design
There are 3 main areas of coursework the SPED Program:
A) General education. 46 credits of general education curriculum.
B) Professional Core. 19 credits. All of these courses are designed around Wisconsin
Teacher Standards 1 though 10. Students progress through three benchmarks each of which provide an assessment of student progress and becomes a critical decision point of their knowledge, skill, and dispositions relative to becoming a licensed teacher in the State of Wisconsin.
C) Major Studies. 59 credits of content coursework which concentrates on special education pedagogy, evidence-based practice and experiental learning experiences.
See program plan sheet located in the appendix
2.1.1
State the program objectives.
Upon completion of the program, candidates will be able to:
1) Articulate the historical, legal, and philosophical foundations of special education.
2) Describe the etiology, development, and characteristics of students with and without exceptionalities.
3) Conduct, interpret, communicate, and use the results of formal and informal assessments of students with disabilities.
4) Develop individualized learning, behavioral and transition goals.
5) Demonstrate research-supported instructional strategies.
6) Design and maintain learning environment that enhance student learning and compensate for learning and behavioral deficiencies.
7) Plan, develop, and modify academic, affective and career/transitional curricula for students with disabilities.
8) Demonstrate content knowledge and pedagogical skills in teaching and in supporting the teaching of reading and language arts, math, arts, social studies, and science and social skills to students with disabilities.
9) Communicate, consult, and collaborate with school and community personnel to enhance the education and transition of students with disabilities.
10) Practice within the Council for Exceptional Children Code of Ethics.
Page 3

2.1.2
List the indicators that are monitored to determine the need for program revision, including but not limited to program enrollment, student retention or student graduation rates.
The programs assessment system is consistent with School of Education (SOE) unit-level assessment system. The program monitors student progress across three benchmarks, each of which measures student progress through multiple measures. The measures yield student knowledge, skill, and disposition data. The data provides insight into the program’s curriculum and its impact on student learning. Added insights are generated though the ETS (Educational Testing Service) Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST 5710
Reading, 5720 Writing, and 5730 Math) and the ETS Praxis II (Middle School Content
Test).
4
Indicators also include course evaluations submitted by students, career services and placement records, and follow-up studies of program graduates. Additionally, the program relies on the annual Assessment in the Major (AIM) report. Indicators include
PPST scores, Praxis II Middle School Content test, Educational Benchmarking Inventory
(EBI) scores along with retention and benchmark measures. Also, closely monitored are program enrollment, student retention and student graduation rates.
Advisement Day is the cornerstone of retention. Each semester, prior to Advisement Day, students are instructed to sign up for an hour block of time to meet with faculty advisors in small groups according to class ranking blocks. Questions are raised and answered, program plans sheets are updated, students are informed of changes in scheduling, offerings, prerequisites, and program. Students can work individually with a faculty advisor during this time or with peers to determine their schedules. If substitutions and a full evaluation of their program plans are needed, appointments are made with the program director. Students are expected to attend each Advisement Day. This method has increased the number (exact numbers not available) of Advisement Day participants and class rank schedule has allowed faculty to directly deal with specific issues more efficiently and effectively.
2.1.3
What distance educational opportunities are provided in your program? Does the
UWSA "Distance Education Standards for Academic and Student Support
Services" apply to your program? If so, what evidence of educational effectiveness exists for these experiences? What does this evidence show?
In an effort to better serve the needs of students, beginning Fall ’09 the C & Methods and field experience courses are offered online. Students rotate between coursework online and direct teaching experience in the field. Informal data gathered from students indicated an increase in satisfaction in both the content and more authentic field experiences.
Additionally all core SPED courses (one per semester) are offered on an on-going rotation either in evening, weekend, or online delivery.
See program rotation series located in the appendix
Page 4

5
2.1.4
Give examples and explain the ways in which the program committee functions and contributes to the program.
The program advisory committee has one large meeting per year and one small group meeting per year. All individuals are invited to participate with the majority electing to attend the larger meeting. A status report is shared along with the AIM report. The
PRC Advisory survey reports satisfaction with one large meeting per year (with smaller submeetings), support the strong program plan, field experience, program leadership and quality of faculty. Recommendations included the need for additional faculty and some confusion over the VR-SE (Vocational Rehabilitation – Special Education) certification and the stand-alone major.
2009 Advisory Members:
Dr. Kevin McDonald, College of Technology, Engineering, and Management
Stephanie Hotujec, alumni and graduate student in the program. Teacher at Durand High school
Nikki Deli and Natasha Daniels, student ambassadors for special education
Vicky Thomas, advisement
Dr. Mary Hopkins-Best, alumni of the program and Interim Dean of the School of Education
Sandy White, Continuing Education
Dr. Laura Schmidt, Department of Math, Statistics, and Computer Science
Sue Curtis, Director of Special Education – New Richmond School District
Robyn Criego, Assistant Director of Special Education – Eau Claire Area School District
Sharon Fox, alumni and certification student in the program. Teacher (and cooperating teacher) with the Spring Valley School District.
Renee Chandler, ABD, M.S.Education Program Director, Special Education faculty member
2.1.5
UW-Stout ―programs are presented through an approach to learning which involves combining theory, practice and experimentation‖ (Mission Statement).
Briefly describe the components of your program where students participate in scholarly activity including research, scholarship, development and creative endeavor.
Danielson states teachers must not become dated and stale but become thoroughly acquainted in their field. The Special Education major facilitates this philosophy through coursework in theory
(evidence based research) and practice (experiental). In the Professional Core students participate in experiental learning in Cross-Cultural Field Experiences, general education (Reading 381) and individuals with disabilities (SPED 430). Students also engage in evidence based theory of the foundations of education, multi-culturalism, reading and classroom management. In the area of
Major Studies students again combine evidence based research with experiential learning and action research in diagnosis (SPED 440), assessment (328), two pre-student teaching (326 &
338) placement, culminating in the capstone experience of student teaching. Additionally, each
Major Studies course includes a variety of experience in the application of knowledge, skills and disposition that is reflected in each student’s eportfolio.
Page 5

6
SPED students are expected to provide evidence of the teaching standards through the completion of the Teacher Work Sample for each pre-student teaching experience (SPED 338 and 326) with the final worksample completed during student teaching (SPED 481). The SPED worksample is developmental in nature, it is expected that students learn and grow through each worksample. The compilation of a Teacher Work Sample provides credible evidence of their ability to facilitate learning, assess the ongoing progress of their students and provide the ability for their reflection on their development as a teacher at various points during in their preparation.
The worksample must contain the following:
1) Contextual Factors
2) Learning Goals
3) Learning Environment
4) Assessment
5) Instructional Design

Lesson Plans

Narrative
6) Analysis of Student Learning and Decision Making
7) Reflection and Self-Evaluation
8) Appendices

Assessments

Samples of Student Work

Cooperating/Supervising Teacher Evaluations
Additionally, the SPED program supports its professional organization, SCEC on the university campus. This organization follows the national parent organization of CEC in philosophy and ethics and Danielson’s Domain 4 of Professional Responsibilities. On campus this organization provides opportunities for pre-service teachers in fund-raising, experiences with participating and leading activities for individuals with disabilities in the surrounding communities.
2.1.6 Does your program currently have an accreditation or certification agency that reviews the program? If so, which agency and to what extent do they influence the structure of the curriculum?
The SPED program is required to meet the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (W-DPI) teacher education standards and content guidelines outlined under Public Law 34 (PI34).
Additional information relative to program certification can be obtained from the DPI through its web link at http://dpi.wi.gov/tepdl/qualedinit.html
.
Special education cross-categorical licensure must meet the program guidelines as outlined in
PI34. It is required for each teacher education program to provide prospective teachers with experiences that allow them to meet these guidelines. These guidelines identify critical competencies that must be mastered by each program graduate prior to licensure. Additionally, in the Fall ’09, the School of Education hosted an on-site evaluation for the National Council for the Accrediation of Teacher Education (NCATE) as evidence of SOE’s commitment to excellence.
Page 6

2.2 Faculty/Academic Staff Expertise
2.2.1
List the key people in the curriculum. A key instructor is one who teaches at least one required professional course in your program.
For W-DPI accreditation, discipline certifiable instructors must deliver program courses. Each of the SPED faculty has a broad variety of professional experiences, are certifiable in multiple special education licenses and conduct ongoing research, scholarly activities and service. The
Special Education faculty include: Dr. Amy Schlieve, Dr. Amy Gillett, Dr. Ruth Nyland and
Renee Chandler, A.B.D. Additionally, the SPED program relies heavily on adjunct faculty to meet program needs in teaching and supervision of student teachers (approximately 15 credits per semester).
Dr. Amy Schlieve serves as Program Director and teaches a variety of courses in regards to the behavior of children and adolescents, diagnostics and assessment, and issues involving families, schools and community.
Dr. Amy Gillet is the lead instructor for cognitive disabilities, supervises student teachers and serves as graduate faculty.
Dr. Ruth Nyland shares lead teaching responsibility for the instruction of Inclusion (SPED 430), a required course for all education majors. She supervises student teachers and is the lead instructor for the Early Childhood-Special Education certification.
Renee Chandler, A.B.D. shares lead teaching responsibility for the instruction of Inclusion
(SPED 430), a required course for all education majors. She supervises student teachers and is the Program Director for the Master’s in Education. Ms. Chandler’s position was made possible via a DIN position through the UW-System growth agenda.
All key faculty supervise student teachers and serve as thesis advisors for the Master’s in
Education, Master’s in School Psychology, Master’s in Guidance and Counseling and Ed.S. in
School Psychology. The program relies heavily on talented adjunct faculty to deliver scheduled courses and student teacher supervision. Faculty search primary needs are in the areas of
Assessment and Curriculum. Two searches have begun but externally halted due to university budgetary constraints.
7
2.2.2
What additional areas of faculty/academic staff expertise are currently needed?
The SPED program currently provides 55 credits in the major studies and an additional 5 credits for the professional core, with each course offered a minimum of one time per year. A multiple year rotation of core SPED courses has been designed to have at least one offering of a core class in evening, weekend or online to better meet the needs of students. Since the retirement of a key faculty member several years ago, two searches were initiated and then externally frozen.
Page 7

2.3 Facilities
2.3.1 What special facilities and or capital equipment currently available are utilized and how do they strengthen this program? What additional facilities (special classrooms, labs, additional space involving minor construction) have been requested and has that been filled?
The SPED program is housed in the College of Education, Health and Human Sciences and resides in the School of Education. Most faculty offices are located in McCalmont Hall, with one residing in the Home Economics Building. SPED currently does not have the luxury of assigned rooms or laboratories. Faculty teaches in classrooms across campus, often in rooms that are not conducive to meet the needs of the instructor and students. The program is continual challenged in regards to mediated classrooms and technical assistance during weekend classes.
The need for adequate space and media is apparent across comments. A faculty comment to the
PRC survey sums the issue, ―I have been asked to teach in inadequate classrooms that were not conducive to group work and did not have the basic technology I use when teaching.‖
2.4 Resources for the Program
2.4.1 Evaluate as to currency/up-to-datedness, quality, relevance, and quantity of the library resources to support the program. List or describe any information or service needs created over the past three years by concentration and course changes and include a brief statement as to how these needs have been met by the library.
There are many categories to search under that pertain to special education depending on the topic being searched.
Using the word ―Special Education‖ as search criteria
Table 1 University of Wisconsin Stout
DVD/VHS
E-Books
Educational Materials Center
References
82
21
77
25
Thesis
UW Stout Catalog Books
98
1372
University Library Collection (Periodicals)

Search under Arts and Humanities o Select Education and Careers – 1058
8
Indexes and Databases

EBSCOhost – several search options to seek out special education material
Page 8

o SuperSearch – EBSCO – 32,549

WilsonWeb – several database options to search under special education

Emerald Library - 25,268

FirstSearch | WorldCat several databases to search within to locate information regarding special education

JStor - 137,026

Lexis Nexis - 994

Newsbank – several areas to search special education material, only searching under WI brought up more than 25,000

Project Muse - 25,008

ProQuest – 9,238

Web of Science 9,219
Education Indexes and Databases

British Education Index (free)

EBSCOhost o ERIC (317,000 full text ERIC Documents + 1,017 journal titles) o Professional Development Collection – 520 full text journals, 200 educational reports o Education Research Complete – 1,200 full text titles, indexing and abstracts 2,100 journals, 500 full text book and monographs o Education Administration Abstracts – 66,000 total records o Mental Measurements Yearbook o PsycINFO o PsycArticles

Kraus Curriculum Development Library – 3,500 full text documents, 7,500 documents indexed

WilsonWeb o Education Full Text – 388 full text titles o ERIC
Thousands of additional E-references are available and free for students and faculty use.
Table 2
E-Book
DVD/VHS
Using the word ―disability/disabilities‖ as search criteria
University of Wisconsin Stout
21
22
Educational Material Center
Reference
Thesis
Books
13
27
36
672
University Library Collection (Periodicals)

Category o Search under Arts and Humanities
9
Page 9

10 o Select Education and Careers – 1058
 Title enter ―disabilities‖ - 31
Indexes and Databases

EBSCOhost – several search options to seek out special education material o SuperSearch – EBSCO – 46,347

WilsonWeb – several database options to search under special education or disability

Emerald Library – 2,590

FirstSearch | WorldCat several databases to search within to locate information regarding special education and disabilities

JStor – 11,593

Lexis Nexis – 1,000

Newsbank – several areas to search special education material, only searching under
―The World‖ using the word ―disability‖ brought up 2,290,502 and under ―U.S.‖ brought up 1,626,979

Project Muse – 3,476

ProQuest – 4,549
Education Indexes and Databases

British Education Index (free)

EBSCOhost o ERIC (317,000 full text ERIC Documents + 1,017 journal titles) o Professional Development Collection – 520 full text journals, 200 educational reports o Education Research Complete – 1,200 full text titles, indexing and abstracts 2,100 journals, 500 full text book and monographs o Education Administration Abstracts – 66,000 total records o Mental Measurements Yearbook o PsycINFO o PsycArticles

Kraus Curriculum Development Library – 3,500 full text documents, 7,500 documents indexed

WilsonWeb o Education Full Text – 388 full text titles o ERIC
Thousands of additional E-references are available and free for students and faculty use.
Subject and Reference Guides
In addition to the University Library and UW-system library, the SPED Program utilizes the
School Psychology Assessment Materials Library, located in McCalmont Hall 408 and the
Shirley E. Steward Vocational Evaluation Laboratory.
The School Psychology Program has an extensive collection of assessment materials and the
Page 10

11 software required for scoring and interpretation. The assessment devices include the most recent versions of tools in the areas of achievement and behavior. Additionally, the SPED program has provided materials (stop watches, clip boards etc.) necessary when completing CBM – these materials are also located in the Assessment Library. SPED students are able to check out these materials while completing their coursework and during pre-student teaching and student teaching.
The Shirley E. Stewart Vocational Evaluation Laboratory:

The lab is used in the V. R program classes

It is provided for undergraduate and graduate students to experience a hands on learning opportunity
Experienced by giving tests and work samples to one another.
The lab itself contains:
1.
A number of computers
2.
Test material and equipment
3.
Work simulations
4.
Instructor work station
5.
Power point projector
6.
100s of different tests in the following areas: a.
Intelligence tests b.
Achievement tests c.
Aptitude tests d.
Personality tests e.
Interest test f.
Specialized tests
2.4.2 List any special resources used to meet program and/or student needs such as:
Academic Computing, Instructional Technology Services for curriculum materials development, ASPIRE, Research Center, Media Self-Instruction Lab,
Academic Skills Center, etc. List or describe any other resources which are needed to meet the program objectives with a brief statement as to how these would enhance or maintain the concentration quality.
The program director and program advisors frequently direct students to a variety of assistance centers as follows:
The Academic Skills Center: This center is used as a referral point for students needing assistance in basic skills development. The program director or key instructors recommend the center’s services when a weakness in a student is noted.
The School of Education provides backbone for required services such as the pre-professional
Page 11

12 skills tests, criminal background checks, student progress checks, student teacher placements, eportfolio support, and support personnel that supports student success in passing their PPST).
The Counseling Center: This Center provides professional, personal, and career counseling to students.
Learning Technologies Services: This support service provides the program with E-scholar mentors, just in time laptop training, and the Ask 5000 help desk. These are critical services that allow students to obtain necessary skills not generally taught within a university setting.
Career Services: Students are referred during their freshmen year to review resume building and other career services. Students are encouraged to utilize career placement services during their student teaching experience to efficiently merge into their initial teaching job.
2.5 Assessment in the Major
2.5.1
Attach your most recent Assessment in Major report.
See AIM report located in the appendix
3. Supply evidence of the quality of the graduates of the program.
3.1 Describe the demand for graduates and anticipated changes or trends in such positions/roles.
According to the 2007 Wisconsin Teacher Supply and Demand Study, the SPED licensure area is one with severe and chronic educator shortages.
The same report sent a survey mailed to all school districts included the following open-ended question:―Given projections of vacancies over the next five years, which subject/licensure areas do you anticipate will be most problematic for your district to hire qualified personnel?‖ Of the school districts that returned surveys, 254 responded to the question. Overall, critical shortage areas most frequently cited were Special Education, Mathematics, General Science, Technology
Education, and Foreign Language.
Categories and Criteria for Employment Outlook lists Special Education as ―Supply Below
Average.‖
According to the University of Wisconsin-Stout Fact Book:
Fall Semester Undergraduate Enrollment
Special
2004
N/A
2005
27
2006
53
2007 2008 2009
66 71 78
Education
Fall Semester Undergraduate Enrollment by Gender
Page 12

13
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
M F M F M F M F M F M F
Special 2 25 9 44 10 56 13 58
Education
Undergraduate Degree by Academic Year
2004 ’05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09
Special 1 2 7 14
Education
09-10
According to the U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Outlook Handbook Educational
Services, employment in public and private educational services is anticipated to grow by 12 percent, adding about 1.7 million new jobs through 2018. Rising student enrollments at all levels of education will create demand for educational services. Special education teachers held a total of about 473,000 jobs in 2008. Nearly all worked in public and private educational institutions. A few worked for individual and social assistance agencies or residential facilities, or in homebound or hospital environments. Employment is expected to increase faster than the average for all occupations. Job prospects should be excellent because many districts report problems finding adequate numbers of licensed special education teachers.
Employment change.
The number of special education teachers is expected to increase by 17 percent from 2008 to 2018, which is faster than the average for all occupations. Although student enrollments in general are expected to grow more slowly than in the past, continued increases in the number of special education students needing services will generate a greater need for special education teachers. As noted above, since becoming a stand alone major, the program has shown steady growth each year. Of particular note is the increase in males entering the major.
According to Recruiting and Retaining Male Special Education Teachers (Rice, 2005) ―The percentage of male students who complete an undergraduate degree in the field of special education continues to be much lower than that of female graduates. Low status, low salaries, the perception of teaching as women's work, potential complaints of child abuse and sexual harassment, and a lack of male peer needed to be positive role models for all children. The need for male is paramount. The reasons for groups factor into this low percentage. Male teachers are teachers as special educators the gender disparity in special education are discussed based on the current literature, as is the need for possible strategies to encourage more male special educators.‖ As with many education majors, special education majority gender represented is female – the increase enrollment of males entering SPED at UW-Stout is encouraging.
Recruitment Plan
An update of the glossy is sent to every school district in the area, as well as to alumni. Working with Dr. Schlieves’ and Celene Fry’s offices to coordinate efforts will continue. Brochures have been sent to all of the conferences where faculty members have attended (i.e. WI Indian
Education Association, WI School Counselor Association, and Council for Exception Children national conference). The program also utilizes the SOE SPED Student Ambassador for school visits, correspondence with potential students and any other activity deemed appropriate. The efforts of the program are consistent with the efforts across the nation in the recruitment and retention of quality candidates to teach special education.
Page 13

14
Advisement Plan
Each semester during the scheduled Advisement Day, students sign up for an hour block of time to meet with faculty advisors in a small group format. Questions are raised and answered, program plans sheets are updated, students are informed of changes in scheduling, offerings, prerequisites, and program. Students can work individually with a faculty advisor during this time or with peers to determine their schedules. If substitutions and a full evaluation of their program plans are needed, appointments are made with the program director. Students are expected to attend each Advisement Day. Beginning in Spring ’07 students now register for advisement via the internet in class ranking blocks. This method has increased the number of
Advisement Day participants and class rank schedule has allowed Drs Amy Schlieve, Amy
Gillett and Ruth Nyland to directly deal with issues more efficiently and effectively.
Retention Plan
Through advisement and class interactions, retention should remain high for the major. Due to the requirements of the e-portfolio, the content exam, and benchmark interviews, there has been some movement away from all teaching majors on campus. Also, the PRAXIS II (Wisconsin requires the Middle School Content test) being a broad middle level exam, rather than specific to the major, passing of this exam will continue to be problematic for many of our students as it is for other Special Education majors in the state. At this time there are no program quotas in place, yet additional faculty would be needed for the program to gain many more numbers.
Students’ program plan sheets are updated each semester to verify their progress toward graduation. When there has been an academic problem, the student has been advised of his/her options for remediation of the problem and how the program faculty has helped. In some instances, students have been counseled out of the program and referred to other majors and program directors on campus.
3.2 Interpret the data from the Institutional Research Office follow-up studies.
The most recent Alumni survey was completed by 2006 graduates which reflects graduates from the VR-SE (certification) program. The stand alone major for Special Education began in the
Fall of 2004. The data from future alumni surveys will prove to be more meaningful. The N was zero for the five year follow-up. Therefore, this data was not reported.
3.3 Interpret the major results from your Specific Program Survey.
Table 3 Special Education Course Instructor Responses (N =1)
Question Don’t Know = 1 Inadequate = 3
Poor = 2
Quality of classroom facilities for my course(s).
Quality of laboratory facilities for my course(s). (If applicable)
Adequacy of equipment for my course(s).
Adequate = 4
Mean = 6.00
Mean = 1.00
Mean = 5.00
Good = 5
Excellent = 6
Page 14

15
The students entering my courses are adequately prepared to successfully complete them.
Communication between program director and yourself.
The Library Learning Center meets the needs of the students in my class(s).
The Library Learning Center meets my needs for research and professional development.
Mean = 4.00
Mean = 4.00
Mean = 4.00
Mean = 4.00
Faculty report that the program is perceived by self and others as being solid and of high quality, yet the need for additional faculty is critical.
Table 4 Program Faculty Responses (n = 2)
Question Good = 5
Excellent = 6
Don’t Know =
1
Poor = 2
Inadequate = 3
Adequate = 4
Mean = 6.00
Mean = 6.00
Quality of instruction in the core courses.
Relevance of information presented in the core courses.
Student mastery of degree content by program graduates.
Communication between the program director and yourself.
Program director's leadership.
Department cooperation in scheduling an adequate number of course sections.
Preparation of students entering my course(s).
Quality of classroom facilities for my course(s).
Quality of laboratory facilities for my course(s). (if applicable)
Clerical support for my course(s).
Adequacy of equipment for my course(s).
Adequacy of supplies for my course(s).
Ability of the Library Learning Center to meet the needs of my students.
Ability of the Library Learning Center to meet research and professional needs.
Mean = 5.50
Mean = 6.00
Mean = 6.00
Mean = 5.00
Mean = 5.50
Mean = 4.50
Mean = 3.00
Mean = 5.00
Mean = 4.50
Mean = 5.00
Mean = 6.00
Mean = 6.00
Page 15

16
Opportunity to participate in the program's decisions. Mean = 6.00
Additional Feedback reports that the program is serving the students needs, listens and respond to their needs and provides excellent customer service.
Strengths:
1.
Sequencing of courses
2.
Practical experiences tied to coursework
3.
Talent of faculty
4.
Quality of students
The program is perceived to be student friendly by its faculty. Recommendations for program improvement include;
1.
Need for more appropriate classrooms, faculty report teaching in ―inadequate classrooms that were not conducive to group work and did not have the basic technology I use when teaching.‖
2.
Mediated classrooms don’t function correctly.
3.
Better classroom allocations.
4.
Need for additional faculty
Program Student Feedback
Student specific responses were obtained from 2 junior and 13 senior level students.
Table 5. Program Respondent Profile (n = 16) Response Rate: 16/43 = 37%
1
2
Junior
Senior
Total
2
13
15
Table 6 provides detailed student Reponses to key questions about their program perceptions and experience.
Table 6 Program Junior and Senior Level Responses (n = 16)
Question
1
2
3
The library resources and access to collections are adequate for my program of study.
My written communication skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
My critical thinking skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
Page 16
0
0
1 0 5
0 0 5
9 15 4.47
8 13 4.62
0 0 0 4 7 11 4.64

17
4
5
6
7
My problem-solving skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
The classroom facilities meet the needs of students in my program.
The laboratory equipment for my program is up-to-date.
My advisor is accessible on a routine basis.
0
0
8
Instructors in my program are accessible for help outside of regular class time.
0
9
10
11
12
Instructors in my program provide current and relevant information.
Instructors in my program achieve the stated objectives as presented in their course syllabi.
The evaluation procedures for my courses in my program appropriately measure my learning.
My program's objectives were made clear to me and are being met.
0
0
0
0
13
My program has few or no problems with unnecessary repetition or overlap of content.
1
14 My program requirements can be completed in a reasonable time. 1
0
2
15
As I near the completion of my degree, I feel confident that my program has prepared me to be successful in my profession.
16 Overall, this is a quality program.
17 If I had to do it all over again, I would choose this program.
18
The coursework in ethnic studies that I have taken discourages racism and has given me a greater appreciation of ethnic diversity.
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
1
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
3
4
2
2
1
0
0
4
2
2
2
2
1
3
5
3
4
1
3
5
3
0
9 13 4.69
8 13 4.23
7 13 4.38
6 13 3.77
5 11 3.82
8 10 4.80
7 10 4.60
9 11 4.64
8 15 4.20
5 15 3.96
6 12 4.08
7 14 4.21
9 11 4.73
6 9 4.67
7 9 4.22
19 I have developed a global perspective. 0 1 0 3 4 8 4.25
Added Responses:
Overall, students surveyed reported favorable impressions of the program faculty, fellow students and quality of learning assessments. Respondents listed the following strengths as being collaborative, feels like a family, perceive faculty as ―kind, motivational and knowledgeable‖.
Students also commented that professors are accessible and willing to devote time to questions and concerns. Another student stated, ―The faculty and classes are the strength, they have a passion for the students and it shows.‖ In areas for growth, comments ranged from too few special education resources in the library, need for additional full-time faculty and one comment on repetition of SPED law. Lastly, a student commented on the desire to have classroom experience earlier in the program. SPED students follow the same procedure as other SOE candidates and begin field experience after Benchmark I after a background check has been completed. However, faculty and other program students encourage underclassmen to participate with activities with children with disabilities through the student organization of
SCEC.
Table 7 Mean Scores Student Surveys B.S. Programs Reviewed 2009-2010 PRC
Page 17

18
Question
1
2
The library resources and access to collections are adequate for my program of study.
My written communication skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
3 My critical thinking skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
4 My problem-solving skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
5 The classroom facilities meet the needs of students in my program.
6 The laboratory equipment for my program is up-to-date.
7 My advisor is accessible on a routine basis.
8
Instructors in my program are accessible for help outside of regular class time.
9 Instructors in my program provide current and relevant information.
10
11
Instructors in my program achieve the stated objectives as presented in their course syllabi.
The evaluation procedures for my courses in my program appropriately measure my learning.
PI 34 Licensing of WI
School Personnel
Public Universities
(University of Wisconsin System)
4.53 4.50 4.50 4.47 4.50
4.46 4.50 4.45 4.62 4.51
4.32 4.50 4.45 4.62 4.48
4.44 4.70 4.19 4.69 4.51
4.32 4.43 3.79 4.23 4.19
4.19 4.25 3.90 4.38 4.18
3.45 4.60 3.22 3.77 3.76
3.94 4.73 4.38 3.82 4.22
4.32 4.64 4.31 4.80 4.52
4.19 4.74
4.27 4.53
4.15
3.95
4.60 4.42
4.64 4.35
Independent Colleges and Universities
12 My program's objectives were made clear to me and are being met.
13
My program has few or no problems with unnecessary repetition or overlap of content.
14 My program requirements can be completed in a reasonable time.
15
18
As I near the completion of my degree, I feel confident that my program has prepared me to be successful in my profession.
16 Overall, this is a quality program.
17 If I had to do it all over again, I would choose this program.
The coursework in ethnic studies that I have taken discourages racism and has given me a greater appreciation of ethnic diversity.
4.14 4.50 3.63 4.20 4.12
4.03 3.96 3.54 3.87 3.85
4.36 3.70 3.46 4.08 3.90
4.32 4.72 3.41 4.21 4.17
4.22 4.73 3.44 4.73 4.28
3.92 4.47 3.12 4.67 4.05
4.48 4.47 4.37 4.67 4.05
19 I have developed a global perspective. 4.00 4.52 4.45 4.25 4.31
As demonstrated in Table 7, SPED majors consistently rate their program above the mean of 4.0 in 16 out of 19 areas. Two rating of 3.77 and 3.82 reflect the need for additional faculty.
4.
Supply evidence of continuous improvement efforts of the program.
4.1.Describe the strengths and unique features of your program that distinguish it from similar programs. What are the weaknesses of the program?
Table 8 Public and Private Universities
Page 18

19
(Programs Completed
After 8-31-04)
- - - http://dpi.wi.gov/tepdl/in dexed.html (01-22-10)
- - - For information about specific programs, contact the certification office of the college/university directly.
KEY:
# = indicates an experimental/innovative program
G = graduate program
M = teaching major m = teaching minor
● minor approved for mc-ea program
■ minor approved for ea-a program c = concentration
MIDDLE CHILDHOOD -
EARLY ADOLESCENCE
(MC-EA = Age 6 though
Age 12 or 13) (72)
Cross
Categorical Special
Education (801)
M
M m
M M
M c
M
M M M M
M m
M
M M M M M M
M
G
M M M M M M M
G G G
M
According to the table above, 4 public and 2 private institutions in Wisconsin offer a B.S. degree leading to licensure in Cross-Categorical Special education. Of the Wisconsin institutions, UW-
Whitewater offers the most comprehensive of those offering Cross-categorial licensure as they offer an emphasis in all 3 major disability areas (Cognitive Disabilities, Learning Disabilities,
Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities). While the majority of UW-Stout SPED majors live in the upper one-half of Wisconsin and eastern Minnesota, another strong draw to the program is its emphasis in cognitive disabilities and strong relationship with UW-Stout Vocational
Rehabilitation program.
Alternative Licensing
PI 34 allows for the development and approval of alternative programs for initial educator licensing. According to the Index of Approved Wisconsin Alternative Programs Leading to
Initial Educator January 2010, Alternative programs require a bachelor degree for admission and are not direct competition for the SPED B.S. program.
The program continues to work closely with the Minnesota Department of Education to ensure that Stout special education teacher graduates are certifiable in Minnesota. Currently, program graduates are eligible for K-12 certification in all three primary special education areas.
4.2.
Submit evidence of program response to the concerns and recommendations in your previous program review.
Page 19

20
This is the first review.
4.3
In the next seven years, what are the major improvements or changes you plan to implement to improve program quality?
Hire additional faculty
Designated classroom space
Continue recruitment and retention of quality candidates with an emphasis on encouraging high school males and minorities to the field
Continue to maintain and develop new partnerships with K-12 communities
Based on faculty availability, continue to design and offer distance learning courses
The hiring of a new faculty member is critical in achieving many of the above goals. The program director will continue to work closely with the Director of the School of Education and the Dean of the College of Education, Health and Human Services. A number of the above goals are contingent of the hiring of a new faculty member and the issues surrounding classroom space. Additionally, the program director will continue to work with the SPED Student
Ambassador and President of SCEC (Student Council for Exceptional Children) in the recruitment and retention of quality student candidates.
5. Attachments
5.1 Submit any other information or documentation that may be helpful to the Planning and
Review Committee in reviewing the quality of the program including interpretation of data from Institutional Research and PRC data.
5.2 Links of specific program information to be included:

Program plan sheet

Current assessment in the major

Current program advisory committee

Other items requested by the consultant
Page 20

21
Page 21

~ leading to licensure to teach students with CD,
LD, and EB/D
Approved: Dec. 2004 / Catalog Year: 2005
Sem ***General Education Studies Cr Gr
A. Communication Skills 8
*ENGL-101 Fr Eng-Comp or
*ENGL-111 Fr Eng-Honors 1
3
3 *ENGL-102 Fr Eng-Read or
*ENGL-112 Fr Eng-Honors II
*SPCOM-100 Fund of Speech
B. Analytic Reasoning
*MATH-118 Concepts or higher
*STAT-130 Elementary Statistics
C. Health / Physical Education
____-____ ________________
____-____ ________________
(PE#100 level approved Gen.Ed.)
2
6
4
2
2
D. Humanities
LIT-____ __________________
____-_____ ARTMU or CRP
*HIST-210 Mod World
10
3
1-3
3
3 *HIST-120 Early US History or
*HIST-121 Mod US History
E. Social/Behavioral Sciences
*POLS-210 Am Government
PSYC-110 Gen Psychology
*GEOG-104 World Geography
9
3
3
3
F. Natural Sciences
*BIO-101 Intro to Biology
Select TWO of the following:
*CHEM-105 Visualizing Chem
*PHYS-151 Astronomy
*PHYS-211 Intro to Physics
*PHYS-255 Meteorology
*PHYS-258 Intro to Geology
G. Technology
____-____ ________________
Any approved Tech
8
4
2
3
3
2
2
2
*** General Studies must come from the approved
General Educational list. Students must comply with
UW-Stout’s Ethnic Studies and Global Studies requirements.
** Admission into Education (Benchmark 1) is required to enroll in these courses.
* Students must receive a C or better in these courses.
Benchmark approval : _____ 1 _____ 2 _____3
PPST passed: _____
Content test passed: _____
22
Name:
ID#:
PROFESSIONAL STUDIES*
Special Education Cognitive Disability
78 Credits
Sem Offered Cr Gr
*M. Pro. Ed. Studies
F, Sp EDUC-303 Educational
Psychology
F, Sp EDUC-326 Foundations of
Education
19
3
2
F, Sp
F, Sp
EDUC-336 Multiculturalism
**EDUC-376 FE X-cult
F, Sp **EDUC-380 Elem. Reading and Lang Dev
F, Sp **EDUCc-381 FE Elem.
Reading and Lang. Arts
2
1
3
1
F, Sp **EdDUC-382 Sec. Reading and Lang Dev.
2
F, Sp **EDUC-415 Class. Manage. 2
F, Sp SPED-430 Inclusion 3
F
F
*N. Major Studies
F, Sp Rehab-310 Voc Eval
SPED-100 Intro to SE
SPED-300 Intro to CD
59
3
1
3
Sp
F, Sp
SPED-301 Intro to LD
SPED-447 Behavior Prob
Sp SPED 330 Comm Dis
Sp **SPED-322 C&I: Moderate
/Severe/Profound
F **SPED-323 C&I: Mild Dis
3
3
3
2
F **SPED-324 C&I: Career
Sp **SPED-326 Pract: CD
(circle) Elementary Middle HS
Sp **SPED-328 Assessment
F **SPED-420 School, Family,
Community Collaboration
Sp **SPED-440 Diag Remed
F, Sp **SPED-490 Behav Interv
4
2
3
3
2
3
3
F, Sp **SPED-338 Pre-Student
Teaching
(circle) Elementary Middle HS
3-6 F, Sp PSYC-352 Adol. Psych AND
PSYC-251 Child Psych OR
HDFS-255 Lifespan Dev
F, Sp **SPED-481 Student Teach
(circle) E lementary Middle HS
16

B.S. Special Education Sample Four Year Sequence
Semester 1
ENGL-101/111 Freshman English
SPCOM 100 Speech
SPED 100 Introduction to Special Education
PSYC 110 General Psychology
MATH 118 Concepts of Math
Technology
Semester 3
HDFS 255 Lifespan Development
LIT XXX any approved Literature
HIST 210 Modern World History
Art/Music/Creative/Performing Art
SPED 430 Inclusion
REHAB 310 Vocational Evaluation
BENCHMARK I (see assessment plan)
Semester 5
EDUC 380 Reading/Language Arts Elementary
Ed.
EDUC 381 Preclinical: Elem. Language Arts,
Rdg
Physical Science
EDUC 336 Multiculturalism
EDUC 376 Multiculturalism Field Experience
SPED 323 C & I Mild Disabilities
SPED 338 Pre-Student Teach: Children
W/Disabil
Semester 7
EDUC 415 Classroom Management
SPED 420 School, Family & Community
Collabor
SPED 490 Behavioral Interventions in Schools
SPED 324 C & I Career & Transition Ed
SPED 328 Assessment IEP/ITP
EDUC 382 Sec. Reading & Language
Development
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
1
3
2
3
1
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
3
2
1
Semester 2
ENGL 102/112 Freshman English
Reading
POLS 210 American Government
BIO 101 Introduction to Biology
Physical Science
EDUC 326 Foundations of Education
Health/PE
STAT 130 Elementary Statistics
Semester 4
HIST 1203121 Early or Modern US
History
SPED 300 Intro to Indivl W/Cog
Disabilities
SPED 301 Learning Disabilities
SPED 330 Intro to Communication
Disabil
SPED 447 Emotnl/Behav Prob Child &
Adol
GEOG 103 World Geography
Semester 6
SPED 326 Pre Student Tech: Cog
Disabilities
SPED 322 C & I Severe/Profound
Disabilities
SPED 440 Diag/Remed Literacy/Math
Disability
EDUC 303 Educational Psychology
Health/PE
Semester 8
SPED 480 Student Teaching
September 2008
16
3
1
2
2
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
2
3
2
4

Fall 08
Fall 08
SPED 301/501
Fall 09
SPED 323/523
SPED 338/538
Fall 10
SPED 420/620
Fall 11
SPED 490/690
Sp 08
SPED 328/528
Sp 09
SPED 330/530
Sp 10
SPED 322/522
SPED 326/526
Sp 11
SPED 440/640
Sp 12/Fall 12
SPED 481 – Student Teachi
SS08
SPED 300/500
SS09
EDUC 415/615
SS10
SPED 324/524
SS11
SPED 447/647
____
1

2008

Overview…………………………………………………………………………………..1
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test…………………………………………………..1
PRAXIS II: Middle School Content Test Summary………………………………………2
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)………………………………………………3
Summary at Benchmark I, II and III………………………………………………………9
Student Teaching Performance Ratings…………………………………………………...13
Alumni Follow-up Survey…………………………………………………………………14
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies…………………………………...17
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program……………………17
Advisory Board Members Spring 2008……………………………………………………18
Recruitment Plan …………………………………………………………………………..13
Advisement Plan …………………………………………………………………………...14
Retention Plan………………………………………………………………………………14

The University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education (SOE) has gathered assessment data gathered from fall semester 2003 through December 2008. In the School of Education, data is gathered from several sources to inform unit and program decisions. Data in this report is used to develop program goals, inform curriculum changes, and enhance course delivery in order to improve teacher education candidate learning. This report contains data from the PRAXIS I: Pre-
Professional Skills Test, PRAXIS II: Middle School Content Test, Benchmark Interviews,
Student Teacher Performances, and the Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI). This report also describes how assessment data is used to set programmatic goals, improve the program, program curriculum, and delivery of courses.
Teacher
Education
Program
SPED
VR
(SPED certificate)
Under- graduate
TOTALS
The data for the PRAXIS I: PPST is summarized below. The strongest area for students in SE and VR/SE in 2008 was Reading and Writing. The data does not delineate between individuals who are sitting the exam for the first time to those who are repeating – thus, it is impossible to determine the first time passing rate. Note that all candidates are required to pass the PPST to be admitted to the School of Education as part of Benchmark I so the pass rate is 100% upon Benchmark I approval. See the full SOE unit assessment report for further information.
2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2007 2007
PPST
Test
Math
Reading
Writing
# test attempts
-----
-----
-----
# (and %) passed
-----
-----
-----
# test attempts
8
9
11
# (and %) passed
7 = 88%
4 = 44%
6 = 55%
# test attempts
15
28
24
# (and %) passed
12 = 80%
11 = 39%
13 = 54%
# test attempts
20
23
23
# (and %) passed
13
10
14
2008
# test attemp ts
16
22
18
Math
Reading
Writing
32
33
32
26 = 81%
24 = 73%
21 = 66%
8
10
9
5 = 63%
6 = 60%
3 = 33%
6
4
7
5 = 83%
2 = 50%
4 = 57%
1
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
--
Math 266 215 = 80.8% 189
151 =
80.0%
204
148 =
72.5%
226
191 =
84.5%
130
2008
# (and %) passed
14 = 88%
18 = 82%
12 = 67%
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
--
102 = 78.5%
Reading
Writing
368
425
214 = 58.2%
206 = 48.5%
239
277
138 =
57.7%
136 =
49.1%
280
296
145 =
51.8%
161 =
54.4%
243
257
184 =
75.7%
200 =
77.8%
150
138
119 = 79.3%
104 = 75.4%

2
For the students in the Special Education (SE), as well as those students with Vocational
Rehabilitation with Special Education Certification in Cognitive Disabilities must take and pass the PRAXIS II Middle School Content test prior to being allowed to student teach. Four areas are covered in the PRAXIS II Middle School Content Test: literature, mathematics, history/social studies, and science. The score needed to pass the Content Test is 146.
The most recent data shows the lowest score for SE and VR/SE students was 122 and the highest score was 176. No comparisons were conducted among the UW-Stout teaching majors, as this is the only major required to take this exam. Most of the other majors are actually being tested on the content within their major. According to data from Datatel, 18 students sat the exam with a
89% passing rate. As with the PRAXIS I, the data does not delineate between individuals who are taking the test for the first time from those who are repeating the test – thus, it is impossible to determine the first time passing rate. Note that all candidates are required to pass the
Praxis II to be admitted to student teaching as part of Benchmark II so the pass rate is
100% upon Benchmark II approval. Please see Table 1 for a summary of these results.
(Middle School
Content test) 2004* 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
-from Datatel
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score
WI Score Need to Pass:
49
184
101
146
1
151
151
146
9
170
130
146
28
185
122
146
22 18
173 176
131 122
146 146
Number with WI Passing Score
Percent with WI Passing Score
* - scores from no-fault year – ―grandfathered in‖ as passing
29/49 1/1 7/9 15/28 21/22 16/18
59% 100% 78% 54% 96% 89%
Content Test from ETS
03/04
Number of Examinees: 59
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Median:
Average Performance Range:
184
101
149
136-
163
Score Needed to Pass:
Number with Passing Score:
146
34/59
Percent with WI Passing Score: 58%
Average Percent Correct
04/05
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
05/06
15
185
128
148
143-
159
146
9
60%
06/07
27
177
134
151
34
174
122
152
148-162 147-158
146
21/27
78%
07/08
146
28/34
82%
08/09
2

Middle School
Content Test
Category
Literature
Mathematics
Points
Available
27-30
29-30
03/04
%
59
53
04/05
%
-
-
%
Stout
05/06 06/07
%
07/08
%
65 66 64
58 62 60
08/09
%
History / Social
Studies
28-30 53 - 56 53 53
Science 28-30 59 - 58 60 58
Middle School
Content Test
Category
Literature
Mathematics
History / Social
Studies
Points
Available
27-30
29-30
28-30
03/04
%
63
63
54
04/05
%
-
-
-
State
05/06 06/07
%
72
71
%
70
69
58 59
07/08
%
72
70
57
08/09
%
Science 28-30 63 - 63 62 63
Fourteen factors are assessed through the EBI ( Scale= 1-7 with 1= not at all, 4= moderately and 7= extremely
) at the conclusion of candidates’ student teaching experiences. The tables below report the data on the 14 factors. Beginning with the Fall semester 2007 an evening and summer rotation (one per semester) began for all required special education courses. This rotation supports non-traditional undergraduate students who are often limited in the number of courses they are able to take during the day. Special Education continues to offer a Post-bachelorette add-on certification for those interested in Cross-Categorical licensure (and who hold a current
WI k-12 CD License) in an evening and weekend format for the 6 remaining courses. Previous graduates of UW-Stout and other universities are enrolled in this program.
When analyzing this year’s data it became clear that the ―N‖ is incorrect. EBI reports 28 respondents and the total number possible was 22. Reviewing the data collected beginning in
2004 – the year the stand-alone Special Education major began - and comparing it with that collected since, Factors areas have trended upwards or remained statistically unchanged.
3
3

4
EBI Factor &
Item Analysis by
Program
SPED
03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
N=12 N=13 N=11 N=12 N=14 N=14
SOE UNIT
04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
N=174 N=142 N=156 N=121 N=75
F1: Quality of
Instruction
Q17. Teaching
Q18. Feedback on assignments (other than grades)
4.83
4.92
4.65
5.23
4.82
5.50
5.71
5.83
5.18
5.43
4.89
5.29
4.75 4.08 4.30 5.58 4.93 4.50
4.37
4.67
4.06
F2: Learning
Theories, Teaching
Pedagogy/Techniques 4.53 4.55 5.08 5.23 5.60 4.74
Q24. Teaching methods (pedagogy)
Q19. Theories of human development
Q21. Learning theories
4.67
4.42
4.50
4.08
4.42
4.83
5.70
4.82
5.18
5.67
4.92
5.33
6.08
5.75
6.00
5.14
4.50
4.64
Q20. Classroom management 4.25 5.33 5.18 5.33 5.69 4.71
Q31. Impact of technology on schools 4.83 4.08 4.82 4.92 4.54 4.77
4.70
4.86
4.73
4.83
4.54
4.56
F3: Research
Methods,
Professional
Development,
Societal Implication
Q27. Professional development
Q30. Professional ethics
Q32. Impact of societal changes on schools
Q23. Inquiry/research skills
Q29. Educational policy
Q28. School law
4.67
4.83
5.25
4.67
4.25
4.01
3.92
4.67
4.17
3.67
4.89
5.36
4.91
5.00
4.36
5.35
5.25
5.67
5.67
5.33
4.95
5.23
5.46
4.62
4.67
4.64
4.71
5.00
4.50
4.64
4.24
4.77
4.56
4.42
4.18
4.67 3.83 5.00 4.92 4.92 4.71
4.33 3.83 4.73 5.25 4.85 4.29
3.92
3.51
F4: Aspects of
Student Development 4.79 4.58 5.12 5.51 5.60 4.86
Q34. Effectively develop a lesson plan 4.83 4.67 5.09 5.75 5.69 5.14
Q35. Foster intellectual development of students
Q36. Foster social development of students
5.08
4.83
4.50
4.75
5.27
5.18
6.00
5.73
5.38
5.46
5.21
5.29
4.85
5.45
4.96
4.81
4.65
4.86
4.44
4.90
4.97
5.05
5.10
4.70
4.70
4.36
5.06
4.55
4.57
4.52
3.94
3.54
5.05
5.82
5.17
5.13
4.93
5.11
4.74
5.04
5.38
4.97
5.03
4.87
4.95
4.65
5.16
4.96
4.74
4.54
4.47
4.03
5.18
5.95
5.26
5.09
4.90 4.83
5.08 5.03
4.70 4.64
5.00 4.74
5.29 4.99
5.02 4.77
4.98 4.73
4.93 4.64
4.78 4.60
4.51 4.38
5.17 4.93
4.97 4.67
4.58 4.56
4.42 4.29
4.02 4.13
3.89 3.69
5.16 5.02
5.86 5.60
5.34 5.20
5.18 5.15
4

5
Q46. Actively engage students in the learning process 5.18 4.75 5.00 5.73 - - 5.05
Q44. Encourage positive social interaction among students 5.09 4.83 5.30 6.09 5.75 5.07 4.87
Q45. Encourage self motivation in students 5.09 4.58 4.90 5.82 5.77 5.00 4.74
Q37. Foster student’s personal development - - - 6.09 5.46 5.21 -
Q33. Foster classroom collaboration
Q38. Develop curricula
Q41. Foster holistic learning
Q40. Manage behavior of students
4.92
4.36
4.36
4.45
4.82
4.08
4.08
4.92
5.18
5.00
4.82
5.00
5.40
5.75
6.00
6.00
5.77
5.46
5.54
5.62
4.93
4.00
4.07
4.36
4.70
5.04
4.44
4.26
F5: Classroom
Equity & Diversity
Q52. Teach children from diverse academic backgrounds
Q42. Establish equity in the classroom
Q51. Teach children from diverse ethnic backgrounds
F6: Management of
Education
Constituencies
Q48, Work with colleagues in your school
Q50. Work effectively with parents
Q49. Work with school administrators
Q47. Deal with school politics
F7: Assessment of
Student Learning
Q56. Informally assess student learning
Q55. Formally assess student learning
F8: Satisfaction with
Faculty & Courses
Q61. Average size of classes
5.15
5.55
4.82
5.00
4.64
4.73
5.09
4.36
4.36
5.09
4.91
5.00
5.47
6.10
4.86
5.00
4.58
5.00
3.81
4.33
3.58
3.67
3.67
4.63
4.67
4.28
5.65
6.25
4.88
4.82
5.09
4.73
4.61
5.00
4.64
4.45
4.36
4.95
4.82
5.09
5.68
6.18
5.82
6.27
5.64
5.55
5.09
5.36
5.55
4.91
4.55
5.91
5.91
5.91
6.27
6.82
5.46
5.77
5.38
5.23
4.88
4.75
5.15
4.77
4.77
5.69
5.85
5.54
5.77
6.08
4.74
5.07
4.43
4.69
4.34
4.64
4.86
4.36
3.50
5.39
5.71
5.07
5.75
6.43
4.68
4.66
4.70
4.64
3.91
4.22
4.02
3.83
3.50
4.93
4.85
4.99
5.33
5.78
5.25
5.17
4.96
-
4.88
5.20
4.58
4.43
4.70
4.56
4.96
4.58
4.24
5.33
4.97
5.11
5.01
5.59
4.80
4.61
4.93
4.86
4.19
5.23
5.19
5.30
5.50
6.02
4.48
4.47
4.02
3.78
5.06
5.09
5.04
5.36
5.87
4.60
4.45
4.10
3.81
5.46
4.93
5.01
5.29 5.12
5.23 5.08
5.03 5.03
5.13 5.01
5.04 4.92
5.22 4.91
4.72 4.61
4.68 4.56
4.97 4.81
4.97 4.85
5.04 4.84
4.90 4.74
4.20 4.11
4.46 4.37
4.33 4.37
4.11 4.05
3.88 3.63
5.29 5.12
5.32 5.23
5.25 5.01
5.44 5.58
5.99 6.11
5

6
Q58. Accessibility of instructors outside of class.
Q59. Instructor’s responsiveness to student concerns
Q60. Amount of work required of student
F9: Administrative
Services
Q64. Availability of courses
Q62. Academic advising by faculty
Q63. Academic advising by nonfaculty
F10: Support
Services
Q65. Quality of library resources
Q66. Availability of
Education School’s computers
Q67. Training to utilize Education
School’s computing resources
5.30
5.10
5.40
5.30
5.70
5.20
4.78
5.57
5.90
5.38
5.50
5.08
5.75
4.75
5.00
4.67
4.30
5.31
5.36
5.27
5.36
5.45
5.73
5.30
5.27
5.36
5.10
5.46
5.73
5.50
6.00
6.25
6.42
5.68
5.82
5.67
5.70
6.18
6.36
6.30
5.77
5.92
5.31
5.26
4.82
5.33
5.30
5.36
5.62
5.00
5.29
5.50
5.79
5.26
5.71
5.07
4.91
5.54
6.00
5.50
5.24
5.07
5.18
4.46
4.35
4.43
4.69
4.99
5.47
5.10
5.30 4.70 4.80 6.00 4.80 4.73 4.37
F11: Fellow Students in Program
Q70. Level of camaraderie
Q71. Commitment to teaching profession
Q68. Academic quality
Q69. Ability to work in teams
6.13
6.10
6.11
6.10
5.34
5.50
5.27
5.50
5.66
5.82
5.55
5.64
6.40
6.50
6.58
6.08
5.62
5.69
6.00
5.46
6.21
6.36
6.36
6.14
5.34
5.48
5.24
5.26
6.10 5.33 5.64 6.42 5.31 6.00 5.35
F12: Student
Teaching Experience 5.72 6.03 5.78 6.11 5.84 6.10 5.49
Q76. Quality of university supervision 5.70 6.36 5.64 5.92 6.15 6.00 5.61
Q77. Support from teachers in school
Q74. Quality of learning experience
Q75. Quality of cooperating teacher
Q72. Process of securing a position
Q73. Choice of
6.20
5.80
6.10
5.20
5.30
6.18
6.45
5.82
5.92
5.83
6.00
6.00
5.91
5.27
5.80
6.67
5.83
6.08
6.08
6.08
5.92
5.85
6.46
5.25
5.36
6.43
6.14
6.07
6.07
5.92
5.89
5.68
5.82
5.06
5.02
5.27
5.14
5.21
4.74
4.72
4.74
4.73
5.27
5.51
5.40
5.28
5.35
5.11
5.06
5.14
5.67
5.16
5.43
5.54
5.42
5.31
5.48
5.69
5.78
5.99
5.92
5.92
5.24
5.29
4.89
5.41
5.51
5.47
5.32
5.39
5.78
5.94
6.03
5.99
6.11
5.34
5.34
5.39
5.09
5.54
5.75
5.49 5.64
5.26 5.32
5.04 5.26
4.89 5.15
4.89 5.27
4.92 5.24
4.94 4.86
5.29 5.52
5.64 5.85
5.43 5.37
4.66 4.98
5.35 5.54
5.53 5.66
5.44 5.58
5.20 5.49
5.21 5.45
5.58 5.89
5.80 6.16
5.89 6.16
5.77 5.99
6.00 5.93
5.00 5.59
5.01 5.47
6

assignments
F13: Career Services 4.43 4.04 4.60 4.80 4.53 3.70 3.83
Q79. Assistance in preparation for permanent job search 4.56 4.83 4.78 5.25 4.89 4.40 4.23
Q80. Notice of job openings
Q83. Number of interviews had with employers
4.33
4.67
4.00
3.75
5.00
5.40
4.55
4.80
4.78
4.33
3.60
3.67
4.18
3.57
Q81. Number of schools recruiting on campus
Q82. Quality of schools recruiting
4.22
4.25
3.60
3.30
4.13
4.50
4.70
5.00
4.11
4.71
3.67
3.25
3.34
3.51
F14: Overall
Satisfaction with
Your Program
Q88. How inclined are you to recommend your Education program to a close friend
Q86. Extent that the
Education program experience fulfilled your expectations
Q87. Comparing the experience to the quality of education, rate the value of the investment made in your Education program
4.87
5.50
4.60
4.50
4.42
4.67
4.58
4.00
4.62
4.82
4.78
4.45
5.25
5.42
5.27
5.08
4.79
5.00
4.77
4.62
4.36
4.64
4.43
4.00
4.07
4.27
4.00
3.91
4.23 4.25
7
4.06 3.77
4.31
4.67
4.35
4.75
4.32 4.02
4.54 3.88
3.91 4.07 3.82 3.57
3.62
3.81
3.69
4.02
3.58 3.25
3.62 3.15
4.51 4.80 4.48 4.41
4.76 5.11 4.77 4.66
4.54 4.81 4.44 4.42
4.23 4.45 4.24 4.11
Questions That Do Not
Comprise a Factor
Q22. Assessment of learning
Q25. Collaboration with colleagues
Q26. State standards
Q39. Write effective
Q43. Use of multimedia technology in
SPED
SOE UNIT
03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
N=12 N=13 N=11 N=12 N=14 N=14 N=174 N=142 N=156 N=121 N=75
5.08 4.50 5.09 5.50 5.62 5.15 4.80 5.14 5.25 5.13 4.92
5.00 4.58 4.64 6.00 5.38 4.71
4.17 4.58 5.70 5.50 5.85 5.29
4.47
5.13
4.85
5.76
5.12
5.91
4.83
5.65
4.68
5.47
4.64 4.58 4.91 5.91 5.23 4.71
4.64 3.75 5.00 5.18 4.46 4.43
4.84
4.76
5.01
5.07
5.20
5.27
4.97 4.88
5.07 4.73
7

the classroom
Q53. Teach children with diverse leaning styles
Q54. Teach areas in content field*
Q57. Identify child abuse
Q78 Opportunities to collaborate with other student teachers
Q84. How academically challenging were Education courses in comparison to Non-Education courses on this campus
Q85. Quality of teaching in your
Education courses compared to quality of teaching in your Non-Education courses on this campus
- - - - - 5.43
5.36 5.08 5.27 6.55 6.00 5.54
4.18 4.42 4.73 5.64 5.42 5.21
- - - - - 5.29
4.90 5.17 5.18 4.42 4.64 4.92
4.90 5.17 5.55 5.33 5.36 5.54
8
-
5.09
4.42
-
-
5.24
4.31
-
-
5.51
4.40
-
- 5.28
5.41 5.29
4.82 4.71
- 4.97
4.24 4.75 4.97 4.68 4.70
4.75 5.03 5.09 5.18 5.21
8

9
For Benchmark I ―meeting the intended learning‖, SE and VR/SE students continue to score at the satisfactory level. All students must satisfactorily complete BMI to advance to BMII. For
Benchmarks II the mean scores were at the emerging and basic level. All students must successfully complete BMII to student teach. For Benchmark III the mean scores were primarily basic, with some scores in the emerging and proficient levels. Please see below for a summary of the results.
Question
Explain personal and professional growth between your initial resume and updated resume.
Explain your philosophy of education.
Explain three personal characteristics that will make you an effective teacher.
Describe yourself as a learner and how that will impact your future teaching.
SP08
SPED
FA08
SOE UNIT
SP08 FA08
Response N=5 N=7 N=96 N=37
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory 5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory 5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory 5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory 5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Describe experiences that have impacted your understanding of diversity and human relations and how these might aid you as you work with students and families
Explain two subject matter/content artifacts and how these examples illustrate your understanding of the content you will be teaching
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory
5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Completed Alignment Summary
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Satisfactory 5 100% 7 100% 96 100% 37 100%
9

10
Question
Describe your Philosophy of Education and how it has evolved
Describe what it means to be a "Reflective
Practitioner"
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and
Domain you feel most competent in
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and
Domain you have experienced the greatest growth
Response
SP08
N=8
SPED
FA08
N=12
SOE UNIT
SP08 FA08
N=71 N=76
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 1 1% 1 1%
Emerging 1 13% 6 50% 25 35% 28 37%
Basic 6 75% 6 50% 44 62% 47 62% n/a 1 13% 0 0% 1 1% 0 0%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1%
Emerging
Basic
2 25%
5 63%
7 58%
5 42%
23
47
32% 22 29%
66% 53 70% n/a 1 13% 0 0% 1 1% 0 0%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1%
Emerging
Basic n/a
4 50%
3 38%
1 13%
6 50%
6 50%
0 0%
21
49
1
30% 17 22%
69% 58 76%
1% 0 0%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 4 50% 6 50% 24 34% 23 30%
Basic 3 38% 6 50% 45 63% 52 68% n/a 1 13% 0 0% 2 3% 1 1%
Reviewers choose 2 of the following; discuss portfolio evidence that: demonstrates your content knowledge demonstrates your knowledge of how children grow and learn demonstrates your ability to create instructional opportunities adapted to diverse learners demonstrates your ability to teach effectively
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 2 25% 5 42% 7 10% 9 12%
Basic 5 63% 6 50% 25 35% 25 33% n/a 1 13% 1 8% 39 55% 42 55%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging
Basic
4 50%
1 13%
2 17%
4 33%
6
6
8% 5 7%
8% 10 13% n/a 3 38% 6 50% 59 83% 61 80%
Unsatisfactory 0 38% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 4 50% 3 25% 12 17% 15 20%
Basic n/a
1 13% 5 42% 18 25% 27 36%
0 0% 4 33% 41 58% 34 45%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 4 50% 2 17% 10 14% 4 5%
10

demonstrates your ability to manage a classroom effectively, including organizing physical space, managing procedures and student behavior, and creating a culture of respect, rapport, and learning
Emerging
Basic
4 50% 4 33% 14
11
Basic n/a
1 13% 5 42% 5 7% 6 8%
3 38% 5 42% 56 79% 66 87%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
1 13% 4 33% 18
20% 13 17%
25% 21 28% demonstrates your ability to communicate effectively with students, parents, and colleagues demonstrates your ability to assess student learning demonstrates your professionalism, including ongoing professional development; fostering relationships with colleagues, families, and the community; and displaying ethical behavior expected of education professionals n/a n/a 3 38% 4 33% 39 55% 42 55%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging
Basic
2 25%
5 63%
1 8%
4 33%
3
9
4%
13%
3 4%
9 12% n/a 1 13% 7 58% 59 83% 64 84%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 3 38% 3 25% 13 18% 12 16%
Basic n/a
4 50% 4 33% 16 23% 18 24%
1 13% 5 42% 42 59% 46 61%
Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 2 25% 2 17% 11 15% 12 16%
Basic 5 63% 3 25% 18 25% 24 32%
1 13% 7 58% 42 59% 40 53%
11

12
Question
Artifacts from student teaching, reflection ratings
Final Student Teaching Assessments and
Recommendations from Cooperating Teachers
Disposition ratings from student teaching from cooperating & University Supervisors
Alignment Summary of artifacts meeting all 10
Wisconsin Teaching Standards & 4 Domains/
Components & reflections/ reflection ratings
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient n/a
SP08
SPED
FA08
N=9 N=6
SOE UNIT
SP08 FA08
N=87 N=56
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0% 5 6% 2 4%
1 11% 3 50% 31 36% 25 45%
8 89% 3 50% 51 59% 25 45%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 5%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 1 17% 4 5% 3 5%
0 0% 2 33% 27 31% 20 36%
9 100% 3 50% 56 64% 32 57%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 1 17% 2 2% 2 4%
1 11% 2 33% 29 33% 17 30%
8 89% 3 50% 56 64% 34 61%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 2 33% 1 1% 7 13%
1 11% 2 33% 9 10% 10 18%
8 89% 3 50% 77 89% 38 68%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
12

13
The table below indicates the final ratings for student teacher competencies in the ten Wisconsin
Teacher Standards for 2008. After completion of their student teaching experience, each student should be at the emerging or basic level. It is rare that students would be at the advanced basic state in their development. The means for the reported standards were 3.78 to 4.00 for Spring
2008 and a range of 3.5 to 4.0 for Fall 2008. Based on the data, all student teachers are satisfactorily prepared for licensure. It is also evident that the Special Education Candidates consistently rate at or above the Unit means. See table below.
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
SPED SOE UNIT
SP08
N=9
FA08
N=4
SP08
N=88
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching
Teachers know how children grow
FA08
N=47
Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev.
3.89
3.89
0.33
0.33
4.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
3.63
3.52
0.47
0.51
3.79
3.70
0.30
0.50
Teachers understand that children learn differently
Teachers know how to teach
4.00
3.89
0.00 4.00
0.33 4.00
0.00 3.63
0.00 3.54
0.50 3.72
0.47 3.68
0.40
0.50
Teachers know how to manage a classroom
Teachers communicate well
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons
Teachers know how to test for student progress
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves
Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community
3.78
3.89
3.78
3.89
3.78
3.78
0.44 3.75
0.33 3.50
0.44 3.75
0.33 4.00
0.44 3.75
0.44 3.45
0.50 3.48
0.58 3.55
0.50 3.54
0.00 3.59
0.50 3.68
0.53 3.61
0.46 3.60
0.47 3.66
0.63 3.74
0.54 3.71
0.52 3.70
0.52 3.74
0.50
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
13

14
The Alumni survey completed by 2006 graduates reflects graduates from the VR-SE
(certification) program. The stand alone major for Special Education began in the Fall of 2004.
While this information will be shared with VR, the data from future alumni surveys will prove to be more meaningful. The N was zero for the five year follow-up. Therefore, this data was not reported.
1 Year
Student Data
Appreciating and Understanding Year Graduated
Diversity
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education - - - - - - - - 3 3.3
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined - - - - - - - - 58 3.74
Student Data
1 Year
Developing a Global Perspective
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1998 2000
Year Graduated
2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education
- - - - - - - - 3 3.3
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined - - - - - - - - 59 3.47
Student Data
Writing Effectively
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education
- - - - - - - - 3 3.0
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined
- - - - - - - - 59 3.31
14

15
1 Year
Speaking or Presenting Ideas
Student Data
Year Graduated
Effectively
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
2000 2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education
- - - - - - - - 3 4.0
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined
- - - - - - - - 59 3.76
Employer Data
Listening Effectively
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education
- - - - - - - - 3 3.7
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined
- - - - - - - - 59 3.49
Student Data
Utilization of Technologies
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean
Vocational Rehabilitation – Special
Education - - - - - - - - - 4.0
All UG Initial Teacher Programs
Combined - - - - - - - - 59 3.61
15

(1=Not at all 2= Moderately 3=Extremely)
1. Create meaningful learning experiences for students based on your content knowledge?
2. Provide instruction that supports student learning and intellectual, social and personal development?
3. Create instructional experiences adapted for students who learn differently?
4. Use a variety of learning strategies to encourage critical thinking and problem solving?
5. Create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning and self-motivation?
6. Use effective verbal and nonverbal communication techniques, media and technology to foster active inquiry, collaboration and supportive interaction in the classroom?
7. Plan instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the community and curriculum goals?
8. Use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress?
9. Reflect on teaching and evaluate the effects of choices and actions on pupils, parents and others?
10. Foster relationships with colleagues, parents and the community to support student learning and wellbeing?
Year Graduated
2006
N Mean
4 2.25
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2.25
2.25
2.25
2.50
2.25
2.25
2.25
2.50
2.75
16
16

17
Data will be communicated to faculty members through informal and formal means. Program faculty meet during scheduled discipline area work group meetings (DAWG) designed to support ongoing program improvement. Program faculty and staff then discuss ways to better meet the needs of students throughout the program. Action plans for desired change result from work group meetings. Each SPED faculty member is charged to lead an area of improvement. Program advisory board members also receive a copy of and discuss the assessment in the major report.
At the fall meeting of each year the document is summarized and discussed as to their recommendations for improvement. Supervising teachers are in charge of informing their cooperating teachers of the document and requesting feedback from them regarding improvements they recommend for the program.
With feedback from program faculty and staff, advisory board members, and cooperating teachers, there are continuous improvements being made to the program. The program plan sheet for Special Education – Cross-Categorical was again modified to reflect when the courses are offered. Since the faculty and staff allocations are small (although the program is experiencing steady growth) some courses are offered once a year. Beginning in Spring ’08 a course rotation was developed to offer 1 special education course per semester in evening format. Students are being advised of changes – with special attention to when once-a-year courses will be offered to better plan their progress to completing the major.
The following are changes or improvements planned for the upcoming year.

There is continued need for hiring of SE graduates. Of the 35 students enrolled in
Introduction to Special Education none had declared VR/SE as their major – all incoming students have chosen B.S. Special Education.
 Fall ’07 began a shift in two C & I Methods and field experience courses. These four courses combined (two fall semester; two spring semester), thus combining a methods and field experience course in a block manner. Students rotated between coursework on campus and direct teaching experience in the field. Informal data gathered from students indicated an increase in satisfaction in both the content and more authentic field experiences. Feedback from the field experience teachers clearly indicated an increase in satisfaction with the students planning, preparation, and delivery of content to the students. In the 2008-09 academic years, this model was replicated in the Early Childhood-Special Education certification program.

The stand-alone major in Special Education in Cross-Categorical, better meets school needs throughout the state and region.
17

18
Dr. Kevin McDonald, College of Technology, Engineering, and Management
Stephanie Hotujec, alumni and graduate student in the program. Teacher at Durand High school
Carrie Thomas, student ambassador for special education
Vicky Thomas, advisement
Dr. Mary Hopkins-Best, alumni of the program and Interim Dean of the School of Education
Michael Nicolai, College of Arts and Sciences
Sue Curtis, Director of Special Education – New Richmond School District
Robyn Criego, Assistant Director of Special Education – Eau Claire Area School District
Sharon Fox, alumni and certification student in the program. Teacher (and cooperating teacher) with the Spring Valley School District.
Significant recommendation from the spring 2008 Advisory Board meeting was to combine a one-day advisory meeting with all education majors and then break-out into individual advisory boards. This suggestion has been forwarded to the Coordinating Chair and School of Education Director.
An update of the glossy fliers will be sent to every school district in the area, as well as to alumni. Many alumni have shown interest in coming back for courses to enhance their degree in
Special Education. In fall of 2005 we started a cohort program to directly respond to the alumni by offering evening and weekend courses to accommodate their full-time working schedules.
Working with Dr. Schlieves’ and Celene Fry’s offices to coordinate efforts will continue.
Brochures have been sent to all of the conferences where faculty members have attended (i.e. WI
Indian Education Association, WI School Counselor Association, Council for Exception
Children national conference).
Each semester during the scheduled Advisement Day, students sign up for an hour block of time to meet with faculty advisors in a group format. Questions are raised and answered, program plans sheets are updated, students are informed of changes in scheduling, offerings, prerequisites, and program. Students can work individually with a faculty advisor during this time or with peers to determine their schedules. If substitutions and a full evaluation of their program plans are needed, appointments are made with the program director. Students are expected to attend each Advisement Day. Beginning in Spring ’07 students now register for advisement via the internet in class ranking blocks. This method has increased the number of Advisement Day participants and class rank schedule has allowed Drs Amy Schlieve and Ruth Nyland to directly and effectively deal with class rank specific issues more efficiently and effectively. Dr. Ruth
Nyland, Dr. Amy Schlieve, Dr. Amy Gillett, and Renee Chandler, ABD were the program faculty with Bonnie Shaw (retired principal and special education teacher) and Vicki Dowell
(retired special education teacher) serving as adjunct faculty.
18

19
Through advisement and class interactions, retention should remain high for the major. Due to the requirements of the e-portfolio, the content exam, and benchmark interviews, there has been some movement away from all teaching majors on campus. Also, the Wisconsin required Middle
School Content test being a broad middle level exam, rather than specific to the major, passing of this exam will continue to be problematic for many of our students as it is for other Special
Education majors in the state.
Students’ program plan sheets are updated each semester to verify their progress toward graduation. When there has been an academic problem, the student has been advised of his/her options for remediation of the problem and how the program faculty has helped. In some instances, students have been counseled out of the program and referred to other majors and program directors on campus.
19