Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 1 of 9 Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation Annual Program Report Academic Year 2011‐12 Gail Kirby February 15, 2013 1. Continuous Assessment Results a. Admission Data Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates approved by the Professional Education Council (PEC) for admission into initial teacher preparation programs during this academic year. Before the Office of Teacher Services submits their names for review and approval by the PEC, candidates must meet minimum requirements established by the state and/or the WKU Professional Education Unit. Table 1. Approved Candidate Test Score Averages Program Exceptional Education ACT N Mean 22 23 PPST Math N Mean 3 175 PPST
Reading N Mean
3
177
PPST
Writing N Mean
3
173
SAT N Mean
No No Data Data GRE Composite N Mean 11 947 Admission GPA N Mean
35
3.21
b. Course Based Assessment Data Table 2 provides the percentage of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates (N = 94) scoring at each level of proficiency on critical performances within education courses for this academic year. Proficiency levels are based on a scale of 1 – Standard Not Met, 2 – Standard Partially Met, 3 – At Standard, and 4 – Above Standard. Table 2. CP Proficiency Level Percentages Course 1 2 3 4 EXED 330 0.00% 5.56% 55.56% 38.39% EXED 331 0.00% 4.35% 65.22% 30.43% EXED 332 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% EXED 333 0.00% 21.74% 39.13% 39.13% EXED 334 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% EXED 415 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% EXED 417 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 85.71% EXED 419 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% EXED 422 0.00% 28.57% 4.76% 66.67% EXED 430 0.00% 90.48% 9.52% 0.00% EXED 431 12.50% 0.00% 0.00% 87.50% EXED 432 0.00% 0.00% 17.39% 82.61% EXED 434 0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 66.67% Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 2 of 9 Course Grand Total 1 2 3 4 0.96% 10.96% 31.45% 56.63% Table 3 indicates the level of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates (N = 94) proficiency across critical performances related to the Kentucky Teacher Standards (KTS). Candidates receiving an overall rating of 3 or 4 on a CP are considered to have demonstrated proficiency on the standards associated with the CP. Compared to the unit‐wide results, Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates are typically performing above average. Table 3. Percent of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by KTS Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide 1 2 Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 3 88.82 89.74 90.84 97.14 85.46 91.67 97% 97% 97% 98% 96% 96% 8 9 10 88.17 77.78 88.14 75.87 98% 97% 97% 95% *KTS Key: 1 – Content Knowledge, 2 – Designs/Plans Instruction, 3 – Maintains Learning Climate, 4 – Implements/ Manages Instruction, 5 – Assessment/Evaluation, 6 – Technology, 7 – Reflection, 8 – Collaboration, 9 – Professional Development, 10 – Leadership Table 4 indicates the number of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Candidates (N = 33) who have scored 2 or lower (below proficiency) on critical performances during this academic year. Table 4. Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Candidates Scoring Below Proficient on CPs Score Student ID 800564905 800713812 800316220 800688336 800565874 800487641 800507333 800580054 800530001 800583185 800541275 800585043 800496753 800585522 800536348 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Student Count 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 3 of 9 800588660 800524812 800595925 800444198 800606910 800161890 800595192 800228334 800537737 800494138 800604163 800533154 800576302 800570221 800530526 800565712 800596607 Grand Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 43 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 47 c. Clinical Experiences Data Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation uses the following courses and experiences to evaluate candidate dispositions: EXED 334 Field Experience for Learning and Behavior Disorders and EXED 416 Field Experience for Moderate and Severe Disabilities. The program has identified the following courses and experiences where candidates report the diversity of their field experiences: EXED 334 Field Experiences for Learning and Behavior Disorders has been designated as the experience where candidates must work in settings at or above the average 11% diversity of the schools in the 30+ counties that represent our service area. Table 5 reports how Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates performed on dispositions as they entered and progressed through their program (N = 84) and during their student teaching experience (N = 7). Students are considered “proficient” who average a 3 or higher on each disposition category. Table 5. Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Proficiency Rates on Unit‐Wide Dispositions Period a. Prior to Student Teaching b. During Student Teaching Values Learning WKU Professional Education Dispositions Values Personal Values Values Values Integrity Diversity Collaboration Professionalism 100% 100% 100% 98.36% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 4 of 9 Over this academic year, Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates (N = 63) reported demographic information on 91 field placements with an average of 15% ethnically diverse students, 47% students on free/reduced lunch, and 16% student with disabilities (based on National Center for Education Statistics and Kentucky Department of Education). This ethnic diversity percentage continues to be above the average 11% diversity of the schools in the 30+ counties that represent our service area. Table 6 reveals the percentages of field experiences with various characteristics. Note that candidates could choose all the characteristics that applied for any given experience. Table 6. Percentages of Field Experience by Category Types Working with Student With Special Needs % Candidates working with Students with Physical Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Learning Disabilities % Candidates working with Students with Moderate/Severe Disabilities % Candidates working with Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders % Candidates working with Gifted Students % Candidates working with English Language Learners % Candidates working with Students with Visual Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Hearing Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Speech/Language Delays % Candidates working with Students with Development Delays % Candidates working with Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder % Candidates working with Students with Other Impairments Working with Diverse Students % Candidates working with African American Students % Candidates working with Native American/American Indian Students % Candidates working with Latino/Hispanic Students % Candidates working with Asian Students % Candidates working with Students with Special Needs (Aggregate) % Candidates working with Diverse Students (Aggregate) 12
61
11
37
51
37
8
8
22
13
18
6
87
12
69
44
90
94
Overall, as can be seen in Table 6, in 91% of their field experiences Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates reported working with at least one student with special needs and in 91% of their field experiences candidates reported working with at least one student from a diverse ethnic group. d. Culminating Assessment Data As Component 4 of the WKU Professional Education Unit Continuous Assessment Plan (CAP) strategy, all initial preparation candidates complete a culminating assessment of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, the Teacher Work Sample (TWS). This assessment is also Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 5 of 9 used to demonstrate candidates’ ability to impact P‐12 student learning. In particular, candidate performances on Assessment Planning and Analysis of Student Learning have been identified as key indicators of candidates’ ability related to student learning. Although in spring 2008 the Professional Education Council agreed that candidates who score a holistic score of at least “2 – Developing” are able to exit the program, for program evaluation purposes our goal is that at least 80% of program candidates will achieve “3 – Proficient” or higher. Table 7 presents the proficiency rate for Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates (N = 2). Table 7. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide % Proficient 100% 96% Because the faculty also scores TWS at the indicator level, we are able to use these scores to ascertain candidate success in meeting each component of the TWS. For program evaluation purposes, candidates are considered successful who average at least 2.5 on a three point scale (1 – Not Met, 2 – Partially Met, and 3 – Met) on indicators aligned to a standard. Table 8 depicts the percentage of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation candidates who averaged at least 2.5 on the indicators for each TWS Factor: CF – Contextual Factors, LG – Learning Goals, DFI – Design for Instruction, ASL – Analysis of Student Learning, and ROT – Reflection on Teaching. Table 8. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Candidates Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide CF LG DFI ASL ROT 100% 94% 100% 91% 100% 89% 100% 92% 100% 88% Because the TWS indicators have been aligned to Kentucky Teacher Standards, we can use these scores to ascertain candidate success in meeting each standard related to the TWS.
Table 9 reports these scores as they relate to Kentucky Teacher Standards. Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 6 of 9 Table 9. Percentage of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Candidates who “Passed” each Teacher Standard Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 0% 83% 100% 91% 100% 92% 100% 88% 50% 83% 50% 76% 100% 88% Additionally, all candidates are assessed during their student teaching experience using the Student Teaching Evaluation form. Table 10 reports the percentages of Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation student teachers (N = 7) successful on each standard. For program evaluation purposes, candidates are considered successful who average at least 2.5 on a three point scale (1 – Not Met, 2 – Partially Met, and 3 – Met) on indicators aligned to a standard. Table 10. Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Proficiency Rates by Kentucky Teacher Standards Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide 1 2 Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 3 8 9 10 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 85.7%
100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 89% 88% 87% 90% 90% 89% 94% 82% 88% e. Exit and Follow Up Data Table 11 delineates the Educational Testing Services reports of the pass rates on the Praxis II content exams of candidates who completed the program in the 2010‐11 academic year (the most recent year with complete data). The last column allows for pass rate comparison of our candidates to our 2008‐09 results. Table 11. Pass Rates on Content Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation Program/Type of Assessment Education of Exceptional Students: Core Knowledge 0353 Education of Exceptional Students: Mild to Moderate Disabilities 0542 Education of Exceptional Students: Moderate to Profound Disabilities 0544 Candidate N (2010‐11) WKU Pass Rate (2010‐11) WKU Pass Rate (2009‐10) 55 100% 100% 20 11 100% 100% 89% 92% Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 7 of 9 Annually, the WKU Teacher Survey is sent to student teachers and alumni who potentially have been teaching one or more years. For the 2011‐12 academic year, out of a possible 8 student teachers, 8 (100%) completed the survey. Below are the results for Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation student teachers, 8 of whom responded. Survey items requested the respondent’s perception of WKU preparation on each of the Kentucky Teacher Standards using a scale of 1 “Poor,” 2 “Fair,” 3 “Good,” and 4 “Excellent.” Standards with average scores of 3 or better across items were considered to demonstrate acceptable program quality. Table 12 reports Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation survey results. Table 12. Average Scores on Teacher Standards Questions for Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Respondents Program Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Unit‐Wide Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 3.50 3.70 3.75 3.60 3.33 3.47 3.44 3.42 3.61 3.37 3.25 3.40 8 9 10 3.50 3.47 3.47 2.97 3.32 3.06 3.31 3.09 Respondents were also able to provide comments. Table 13 presents Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation respondent comments. Table 13. Exceptional Education, Initial Preparation Respondent Comments No respondents answered “poor” for any item or they chose not to comment Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 8 of 9 2. Summary of Results by Kentucky Teacher Standards and Other Key Conceptual Framework Values Candidates in the 2011‐2012 graduating class in Exceptional Education LBD>MSD perform well on the KY Teacher Standards and are consistently proficient in Kentucky Teacher Standards and Critical Performance Indicator scores. According to the assessment data collected unit wide on performance of KY Teacher Standards, Exceptional Education teacher candidates score 85% or higher in all categories except for standard 8: Collaboration, and standard 10: Leadership. It should be noted that there are many more students in the other areas of Teacher Education than in Exceptional Education LBD/MSD. Our data is based on only 7 graduating students. There are some conflicting conclusions to be made using only the data collected unit wide. In addition, some of the Student Teaching Supervisors do not have expertise in special education. Of our 7 student teachers in 2012, most had supervisors with little to no experience in classrooms serving students with moderate to severe disabilities. The Exceptional Education LBD/MSD program at WKU continues to be strong in providing students with opportunities to work with students in diverse environments and provides field experience hours above what other institutions in the state require. As evidenced by data in Table 6, our students are provided opportunities to observe and/or work directly with children with a variety of disabilities and ethnicities. This is a clear strength of our program. Another strength of our program continues to be the dispositions that our students display by the time they reach student teaching. The faculty in Exceptional Education LBD/MSD believes that professionalism and ethical practices are a priority and these dispositions are taught in all classes and emphasized especially in field experiences courses. In evaluating our program with regards to the Praxis II scores of teacher candidates, 100% have passed all three tests: the Core Knowledge for Exceptional Education (0353), the Mild/Moderate Disabilities test (0542), and the Severe to Profound test (0544). 3. Efforts to Report and Disseminate Results Portions and drafts of this report will be shared with the College of Education and Behavioral Sciences Dean and Associate Dean for Academic Programs. Planned efforts to disseminate the final version of this report include the following audiences:  Other WKU College Deans  Professional Education Council  CEBS Department Heads and associated Faculty  Education Professional Standards Board staff  NCATE  The public via the CEBS website Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation 2011‐12 Page 9 of 9 These audiences will be invited to discuss, provide insight regarding, and suggest edits, corrections, and alternative explanations to the findings of this report. 4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results a. Assessment or Data Collection Changes Based on Assessment Results Some hold the belief that some of the areas that appear as weaknesses according to the University‐wide data may not be a true reflection when compared with other indicators of program evaluation. Changes should be made to include all data. In addition, Disposition ratings should be collected more frequently than only at student teaching. This year, that collection of data will be available for next year’s report. The program faculty will also be looking at pas rates of individual tests to determine the need for curriculum change. b. Program Curriculum or Experiences Changes Based on Assessment Results Currently the faculty is in the 3rd year effort to evaluate and adjust the Special Education (new name change) program to be more applicable to the classrooms of the 21st Century. The proposal for the new SPED/ELED Dual Certificate has been through the curriculum process and is currently at the Senate. Following this, the Council for Post‐
Secondary Education (CPE) will review the new proposal. At its approval, the program will begin in Fall, 2013. c. Decisions about Group/Individual Student Progress Based on Assessment Results Having a small program with a small n will skew data. In several areas, our proficiency fell below the unit‐wide average. As a result, we need to include all data so that we can target students at an earlier point in their program who are not moving toward proficiency. Measures are currently in place to track data points along the program 5. Discuss trends in assessment results over the last few years (Please refer back to your 2009‐10 and 2010‐11 APRs which are posted to the College of Education Professional Education Unit website)  The data are contradictory across years. Validity is in question due to small numbers as compared to large numbers in bigger units.  Even with lowers scores, students in the Special Education department are proficient or exemplary in all standards.  In the nationally normed Praxis II tests, our students have a 100% pass rate.