NATIONAL RECOGNITION REPORT
Preparation of School Psychologists
Note: NCATE recognition of this program is dependent on the review of the program by representatives
of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) and review of the unit by NCATE. The NASP
approval decision was made independent of NCATE unit review.
COVER PAGE
Name of Institution
Edinboro University of Pennsylvania
Date of Review
MM
DD YYYY
02
/ 01
/ 2011
This report is in response to a(n):
i Initial Review
j
k
l
m
n
j Revised Report
k
l
m
n
j Response to Conditions Report
k
l
m
n
Program Covered by this Review
School Psychology
Program Type
Other School Professionals
Award or Degree Level(s)
j Master's
k
l
m
n
j Post Master's
k
l
m
n
i Specialist or C.A.S.
j
k
l
m
n
j Doctorate
k
l
m
n
PART A - RECOGNITION DECISION
A1. SPA Decision on NCATE recognition of the program:
i Nationally recognized
j
k
l
m
n
j Nationally recognized with conditions
k
l
m
n
j Further development required OR Nationally recognized with probation OR Not nationally
k
l
m
n
recognized [See Part G]
A2. Test Results (from information supplied in Assessment #1, if applicable)
The program meets or exceeds an 80% pass rate on state licensure exams:
i Yes
j
k
l
m
n
j No
k
l
m
n
j Not applicable
k
l
m
n
j Not able to determine
k
l
m
n
Comment:
A program pass rate of at least 85% was noted.
A3. Summary of Strengths:
The program includes many strengths. First of all, the program provides candidates comprehensive
information on policy and procedures in the Student Handbook, Practicum Handbook, and Internship
Handbook. As indicated in the previous review, the program has developed a wide range of assessments,
including performance-based measures, to evaluate candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions across
the three years of training. Revisions in the Internship Evaluation Form support a more in-depth
assessment of skills across the NASP Domains/Elements. A particular strength is noted in the
requirement for candidates to conduct case studies, evaluate positive impact on student learning, and
orally defend case studies in front of faculty.
PART B - STATUS OF MEETING SPA STANDARDS
Standard 1. PROGRAM CONTEXT/STRUCTURE
School psychology training is delivered within a context of program values and clearly articulated
training philosophy/mission, goals, and objectives. Training includes a comprehensive, integrated
program of study delivered by qualified faculty, as well as substantial supervised field experiences
necessary for the preparation of competent school psychologists whose services positively impact
children, youth, families, and other consumers.
DOMAINS OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TRAINING AND PRACTICE
School psychology candidates demonstrate entry-level competency in each of the following domains
of professional practice. Competency requires both knowledge and skills. School psychology
programs ensure that candidates have a foundation in the knowledge base for psychology and
education, including theories, models, empirical findings, and techniques in each domain. School
psychology programs ensure that candidates demonstrate the professional skills necessary to
deliver effective services that result in positive outcomes in each domain. The domains below are
not mutually exclusive and should be fully integrated into graduate level curricula, practica, and
internship.
1.1. Mission, goals, objectives; integrated and sequential program of studies in school
psychology
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The Program Handbook provides ample information as to the mission, goals, and objectives of the
program as well as their relationship to NASP domains/elements, demonstrating policy documentation.
The program includes a sequence of course offerings for the 75-credit hour degree. The sequence
includes 10 on-line courses. Practice documentation is evident in candidate transcripts. Candidates show
consistency in preparation albeit not identical to the program of study outlined in the Program
Handbook. For example, not all candidates enrolled in READ 706 and other candidates enrolled in
SPED 780, SPED 628 and SPED 730, although not required by the program. There was no indication in
the narrative why these differences between transcripts and program of study are shown.
1.2. Program commitment to human diversity throughout all aspects of the program
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program integrates respect for diversity in its mission. In addition, a course on social, cultural and
biological bases of behavior is also required. Little ethnic and gender diversity is seen among candidates
although the program compares their numbers to the state’s population. Further the program outlines the
manner in which candidates are exposed to a diverse K-12 student population and assessments require
evaluation of skills in working with diverse populations, including ethnic, ability, etc. Faculty ethnic
diversity is also limited. The program embeds diversity issues in various courses.
1.3. Candidate affiliation with colleagues/faculty/the profession through full-time residency or
alternative planned experiences
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The transcripts submitted show that candidates complete the program through a full-time experience.
The Program Handbook did not include language that shows that candidates can complete the program
on a part-time basis but that they must complete the program in three years.
1.4. Faculty requirements/credentials
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
i
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program includes two faculty with doctoral degrees and specialty in school psychology; however,
the third FTE is comprised of individuals from two departments including one where the school
psychology program is housed, who provide support through teaching and oral comprehensive exams.
While the criteria allow for the third individual to be from a closely related field or a combination of
professionals, this individual or individuals need to be involved in the full administration of the
program. For example, in addition to teaching and participating in comprehensive exams, faculty
members are expected to advise, assist with program improvement and candidate evaluation to name a
few. The description provided does not indicate that all faculty are fully engaged.
1.5. Continuing professional development opportunities
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Program faculty need to be commended for their research and presentations at state and national
conferences. Additionally, one faculty appears to also be involved in district professional development.
REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIALIST LEVEL PROGRAMS ONLY
1.6. Minimum years of study/credit hour requirement (3 years/60 hours with 54 hours exclusive
of internship); institutional documentation of program completion
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program of study and transcripts clearly demonstrate that the program meets this element.
1.7. Minimum internship requirement (1 year/1200 clock hours)
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The Handbook specifies that all candidates must complete at least 1200 clock hours of internship. All
interns are engaged in at least the minimum number of 1200 clock hours, as indicated on the Internship
Summary Form.
REQUIREMENTS FOR DOCTORAL LEVEL PROGRAMS ONLY
1.8. Greater depth of study in multiple domains
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Not Applicable
1.9. Minimum years of study/credit hour requirement (4 years/90 hours with 78 hours exclusive
of internship and dissertation); institutional documentation of program completion
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Not Applicable
1.10. Minimum internship requirement (1 year/1500 clock hours)
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Not Applicable
Standard 2. Domains of School Psychology Training and Practice.
General comments: Insert general comments that may be relevant for a number of domains.
NOTE: For each domain below, provide specific comments labeled as ADDRESSED, ASSESSED,
and ATTAINED to explain the basis for any standards judged to be Not Met.
Assessment 1 (state or national exam):
The program requires the Praxis II exam and data show at least an 85% passing rate. Data provided
indicated that candidates meet the NCSP cut-off score of 165. Only one person in each of the three sets
of cohort data presented did not meet the cut-off score. The subtest scores show that candidates are
earning scores in the 50% range, in all Praxis versions except version C. Candidates scored below the
50% range in Applied Educational Foundations, Prevention and Intervention and Applied Psychological
Foundations.
Assessment 2 (Content Knowledge – course embedded assessment):
The tool for assessment 2 is a written comprehensive examination administered toward the end of
internship and includes 11 questions based and linked to all NASP elements. The scoring rubric rates
questions as Acceptable (A), Revise (R), or Acceptable with minor revisions (AR) by one primary
faculty and the second faculty only after candidate revisions. The program should consider adopting a
policy whereby both faculty independently rate the responses in order to ensure validity and reliability
of this measure. Data provided were disaggregated by candidate and shows that out of 9 candidates only
one was required to revise questions (three) in the 2010 cohort. However, more variability was shown
among the two other cohorts: 2 out of 8 candidates in the 2009 cohort and 7 out of 11 of the 2008 cohort
earned ratings of only A.
Assessment 3 (practicum – Professional knowledge, skills and dispositions):
The program administers two practicum evaluations, one in APSY 725 and the other in APSY 735. The
practicum evaluation form includes sections that are linked to all NASP elements except 2.3, 2.6, and
2.9. The scoring rubric is based on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (competence is lacking and
problems exist) to 5 (competence is much above expectations). Candidates can also receive ratings of
Not Applicable (NA) when there is insufficient opportunity to demonstrate the skills. Data show that
candidate cohorts earned ratings of at least 3. The range was from 3 to 5 with the majority lying in the 4
to 5 range.
Assessment 4 (internship evaluation –pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions):
The program indicated that the internship evaluation is the only assessment changed in the last three
years. The program added additional items to the original number of 21 to respond to the NASP
Program Approval Board suggestion that depth and breadth be added. The program is commended for
making improvements. As a result, the evaluation now consists of 36 items across all 11 NASP elements
and includes a more in-depth analysis of candidate skills across elements. The internship evaluation is
administered at 5, 10, 20, and 40 weeks to serve as a formative evaluation tool. The evaluation uses a
Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Competence in need of further training) to 5 (Competence is very well
developed). Ratings of ND (no data) are also possible. Data show that interns received ratings ranging
from 4 to 5 among the 2008 and 2010 cohorts, while candidates in the 2009 cohort received ratings
ranging from 3 to 5. Overall, the 2010 cohort appears to have received the highest ratings in all areas
and demonstrate that interns are demonstrating well-developed skills in all NASP elements.
Assessment 5 (Performance based assessment evaluated by faculty during internship):
The program uses the case study as assessment 5 and requires interns to complete three case studies
during internship for evaluation by faculty (one each with an academic goal, behavioral goal and systems
goal) during an oral exam. The program uses the NCSP rubric Liker-type scale (V-very effective, Eeffective, and N-Needs development) to evaluate the case studies. The case studies are linked to five of
the 11 NASP elements: 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 2.9 and 2.11. Ratings show that the majority of candidates earned
ratings of Very Effective or Effective.
Assessment 6 (Effect on student learning):
Both a quantitative and qualitative method is used to demonstrate impact on student learning. For the
qualitative component the program added a question to the intern evaluation that asks supervisors to rate
the extent to which interns’ presence has helped families and other consumers. The case studies used for
Assessment 5 are also used to demonstrate impact on student learning from a more quantitative
approach. Assessment 6 was linked with all NASP elements except 2.5, 2.7, and 2.10. The program
incorporates percent of non-overlapping data (PND) points. The results yielded effective and very
effective outcomes.
All program assessments show evidence that elements were assessed and attained.
2.1. Data-Based Decision-Making and Accountability: School psychologists have knowledge of
varied models and methods of assessment that yield information useful in identifying strengths and
needs, in understanding problems, and in measuring progress and accomplishments. School
psychologists use such models and methods as part of a systematic process to collect data and other
information, translate assessment results into empirically-based decisions about service delivery,
and evaluate the outcomes of services. Data-based decision-making permeates every aspect of
professional practice.
Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The program lists several courses that address this element. Although the courses address
more traditional assessment practices, the program does integrate informal approaches to data-baseddecision making particularly in APSY 722 and APSY 724.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.2. Consultation and Collaboration. School psychologists have knowledge of
behavioral, mental health, collaborative, and/or other consultation models and methods and of
their application to particular situations. School psychologists collaborate effectively with others in
planning and decision-making processes at the individual, group, and system levels.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: This domain is addressed in a course dedicated to consultation approaches.
It should be noted that the Student Handbook listed several courses as on-line course offerings. The
Collaborative Consultation course (APSY625) is listed as one of these on-line courses. A review of the
syllabus, however, did not indicate that this was an on-line course. It is recommended that the program
amend these inconsistencies.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.3. Effective Instruction and Development of Cognitive/Academic Skills. School
psychologists have knowledge of human learning processes, techniques to assess these processes,
and direct and indirect services applicable to the development of cognitive and academic skills.
School psychologists, in collaboration with others, develop appropriate cognitive and academic
goals for students with different abilities, disabilities, strengths, and needs; implement interventions
to achieve those goals; and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Such interventions include,
but are not limited to, instructional interventions and consultation.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The program requires a course in learning theories that serves as the foundational course to
meet this element. Two other courses support these efforts as well.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.4. Socialization and Development of Life Skills. School psychologists have
knowledge of human developmental processes, techniques to assess these processes, and direct and
indirect services applicable to the development of behavioral, affective, adaptive, and social skills.
School psychologists, in collaboration with others, develop appropriate behavioral, affective,
adaptive, and social goals for students of varying abilities, disabilities, strengths, and needs;
implement interventions to achieve those goals; and evaluate the effectiveness limited to,
consultation, behavioral assessment/intervention, and counseling.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: This element is addressed in the courses listed.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.5. Student Diversity in Development and Learning. School psychologists have
knowledge of individual differences, abilities, and disabilities and of the potential influence of
biological, social, cultural, ethnic, experiential, socioeconomic, gender-related, and linguistic factors
in development and learning. School psychologists demonstrate the sensitivity and skills needed to
work with individuals of diverse characteristics and to implement strategies selected and/or
adapted based on individual characteristics, strengths, and needs.
Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The program addresses this element in the course, Cultural, Social and Biological Bases of
Personality Development. In addition, topics are infused in several other courses.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.6. School and Systems Organization, Policy Development, and Climate. School
psychologists have knowledge of general education, special education, and other educational and
related services. They understand schools and other settings as systems. School psychologists work
with individuals and groups to facilitate policies and practices that create and maintain safe,
supportive, and effective learning environments for children and others.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: This domain is addressed.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.7. Prevention, Crisis Intervention, and Mental Health. School psychologists have
knowledge of human development and psychopathology and of associated biological, cultural, and
social influences on human behavior. School psychologists provide or contribute to prevention and
intervention programs that promote the mental health and physical well-being of students.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The program demonstrates strength in addressing this domain. Candidates enroll in a course
focused on counseling and interviewing as well as a course the directly addresses crisis intervention and
prevention. It must be noted, however, that the Student Handbook course sequence lists this course as an
on-line course. An on-line teaching method may be problematic for a course such as this. It should also
be noted that the course syllabus did not indicate this as an on-line course.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.8. Home/School Community Collaboration. School psychologists have knowledge of
family systems, including family strengths and influences on student development, learning, and
behavior, and of methods to involve families in education and service delivery. School psychologists
work effectively with families, educators, and others in the community to promote and provide
comprehensive services to children and families.
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
i
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The courses listed as addressing this domain show strength in working with families.
Consultation skills are addressed with families. Lacking is the link to the community in order to provide
a more comprehensive service to children and families.
Standard 2.9. Research and Program Evaluation. School psychologists have knowledge of
research, statistics, and evaluation methods. School psychologists evaluate research, translate
research into practice, and understand research design and statistics in sufficient depth to plan and
conduct investigations and program evaluations for improvement of services.
Met
Not Met
j
k
l
m
n
i
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: The program provides candidates with several courses that address this domain (i.e.,
Statistics in Education, Research in Education, and Research in Education II). Candidates learn about a
variety of research methods, with particular emphasis on behavioral methodology. In addition,
candidates conduct a single-subject design research project under faculty supervision. It was not clear
where program evaluation methods were addressed in the program curriculum.
Standard 2.10. School Psychology Practice and Development. School psychologists have
knowledge of the history and foundations of their profession; of various service models and
methods; of public policy development applicable to services to children and families; and of
ethical, professional, and legal standards. School psychologists practice in ways that are consistent
with applicable standards, are involved in their profession, and have the knowledge and skills
needed to acquire career-long professional development.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: This element is addressed in courses listed.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 2.11. Information Technology. School psychologists have knowledge of information
sources and technology relevant to their work. School psychologists access, evaluate, and utilize
information sources and technology in ways that safeguard or enhance the quality of services.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Addressed: This element is addressed in course listed. The program is encouraged to consider how to
enhance information technology skills with regard to application to special populations. For example,
assistive technology would be the next level of addressing this element.
Assessed and Attained: Refer to general comments listed above regarding evaluation of assess and
attain.
Standard 3. Field Experiences/Internship. School psychology candidates have the opportunities
to demonstrate, under conditions of appropriate supervision, their ability to apply their knowledge,
to develop specific skills needed for effective school psychological service delivery, and to integrate
competencies that address the domains of professional preparation and practice outlined in these
standards and the goals and objectives of their training program.
3.1. Practica and internships are completed for academic credit; practica include the
development/evaluation of specific skills; practica are distinct from and precede culminating
internship; internship requires integration/application of full range of competencies/domains.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Candidates earn credit for both practicums and internship. Practicums occur before internship.
3.2. Internship is a collaboration between institution and field site, includes activities consistent
with program goals, and has a written plan specifying responsibilities.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program provides contracts in the internship handbook. Interns are expected to engage in various
activities and these are specified in a written plan.
3.3. Internship is completed on full-time basis over one year or half-time over two consecutive
years; at least 600 hours in a school setting.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The transcripts submitted demonstrate that interns complete the internship in one year. The program also
allows interns to complete the internship on a half time basis.
3.4. Interns an receive average of two hours of field-based supervision per week from
credentialed school psychologist or, for non-school settings, credentialed psychologist.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
Attachment G shows that interns meet this element.
3.5. Provision of appropriate support for the internship experience
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The internship contract outlines responsibilities for the internship site, the intern, and the university. As
such, the program provides interns the appropriate support for them.
Standard 4. Performance-based Program Assessment and Accountability. School psychology
training programs employ systematic, valid evaluation of candidates, coursework, practica,
internship, faculty, supervisors, and resources and use the resulting information to monitor and
improve program quality. A key aspect of program accountability is the assessment of the
knowledge and capabilities of school psychology candidates and of the positive impact that interns
and graduates have on services to children, youth, families, and other consumers.
4.1. Systematic, valid procedures used to evaluate and improve the quality of the program
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program outlines measures used to improve program quality. Many of the changes outlined were
already noted in this submission and strengthened the program’s submission.
4.2. The program applies published criteria for assessment and admission at each level and for
candidate retention and progression. Criteria address academic/professional competencies and
professional work characteristics.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program publishes admission criteria and policies and procedures for progress monitoring. The
program is commended for seeking ways to support their candidates (i.e., discussion with donors to
change the criteria for the school psychology scholarship). Redirecting the funds to assist in the
admissions process increased the program’s pool of applicants.
4.3. The program employs a systematic, valid process to ensure that all candidates are able to
integrate domains of knowledge and apply professional skills in delivering services evidenced by
measurable positive impact on children, youth, families, and other consumers.
Met
Not Met
i
j
k
l
m
n
j
k
l
m
n
Comment:
The program’s use of the case study and evaluation for effects using a PND approach is a strength. In
addition, the effects shown demonstrated their candidates have an effective or very effective positive
impact on student learning.
PART C - EVALUATION OF PROGRAM REPORT EVIDENCE
C.1. Candidates’ knowledge of content
Candidates are achieving high scores on the Praxis II exam. Data on Assessment 2 also show that
candidates demonstrate content knowledge. The comprehensive exam data shows that few candidates
are required to revise the answer to their questions. The questions are aligned to all NASP elements,
demonstrating knowledge across all knowledge areas.
C.2. Candidates’ ability to understand and apply pedagogical and professional content
knowledge, skills, and dispositions
Candidates are demonstrating skill in applying pedagogical and professional content knowledge, skills
in dispositions as shown in the data presented on the practicum evaluation, internship evaluation, and
case study requirement. When combined, candidates show appropriate competencies across all NASP
elements. Of strength is the case study; candidates are required to complete three, one each in
academics, behavior, and systems during internship.
C.3. Candidate effects on P-12 student learning
Case studies are evaluated for positive impact on student learning using percent non-overlapping data
points. Both academic and behavioral goals are incorporated and data show that candidates are effective
or very effective in the services provided to PK-12 students and other consumers.
PART D - EVALUATION OF THE USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Evidence that assessment results are evaluated and applied to the improvement of candidate
performance and strengthening of the program (as discussed in Section V of the program report)
The program integrates a systematic system to make improvements to the program. The program
appears to make use of all data gathered on candidate progress, informal comments, results of Praxis
exam, and comments from sites the candidates serve.
PART E - AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION
LEAVE BLANK
PART F - ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
F.1. Comments on Section I (Context) and other topics not covered in Parts B-E:
The course sequence in the Handbook includes 10 courses that are offered on-line. However, an
examination of course syllabi did not clearly indicate that many of these courses were on-line courses.
The program is encouraged to clearly specify on the syllabus if the course is an on-line course. In
addition, the program should also provide the most recent syllabi for each course. For instance, spring
course syllabi presented were most often ‘Spring 2009’ syllabi rather than ‘Spring 2010.’
NASP and NCATE are working together to ensure that the timelines for NASP reports are consistent
with the timelines for NCATE unit visits. Edinboro's next NCATE visit is in Spring 2013. Since the
NASP report was submitted and approved within 3 years of the NCATE visit, this decision and report
can be used as evidence for the 2013 visit. In order to ensure that the next NASP submission is aligned
with unit timelines, the next NASP submission must be submitted in Spring 2017. This will continue to
ensure that the NASP reports are submitted within 3 years of NCATE visits.
F.2. Concerns for possible follow-up by the Board of Examiners:
PART G - DECISIONS
Please select final decision:
i Program is nationally recognized. The program is recognized through the semester and year of the
j
k
l
m
n
institution's next NCATE accreditation decision in 5-7 years. To retain recognition, another program
report must be submitted before that review. The program will be listed as nationally recognized
through the semester of the next NCATE accreditation decision on websites and/or other
publications of the SPA and NCATE. The institution may designate its program as nationally
recognized by NCATE, through the semester of the next NCATE accreditation decision, in its
published materials. National recognition is dependent upon NCATE accreditation. Please note that
once a program has been nationally recognized, it may not submit a revised report addressing any
unmet standards or other concerns.
Please click "Next"
This is the end of the report. Please click "Next" to proceed.