EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 1 of 9
Exceptional Education – Initial Preparation (Undergraduate)
Annual Program Report
Academic Year 2008-09
February 2, 2011
1. Continuous Assessment Results
a. Admission Data
Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of
Exceptional Education 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
ACT
Program
EXED
N
18
Mean
22
PPST
Math
N Mean
3
177
PPST
Reading
N
Mean
3
177
PPST
Writing
N
Mean
3
173
SAT
N
Mean
GRE
Composite
N
Mean
Admission
GPA
N
Mean
85 3.21
b. Course Based Assessment Data
Table 2 provides the percentage of Exceptional Education candidates (N = 66) 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
EDU-250
EDU-489
ELED-345
ELED-355
ELED-365
ELED-407
EXED-330
EXED-331
EXED-332
EXED-333
EXED-334
EXED-415
1
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2
13%
0%
20%
0%
0%
0%
0%
7%
9%
0%
0%
0%
3
50%
100%
80%
50%
50%
83%
63%
14%
27%
69%
76%
100%
4
35%
0%
0%
50%
50%
17%
38%
79%
64%
31%
24%
0%
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 2 of 9
Course
EXED-417
EXED-418
EXED-422
EXED-430
EXED-431
EXED-432
EXED-434
LME-318
LME-407
LME-445
LME-448
LTCY-320
LTCY-420
MGE-275
PSY-310
SEC-351
SEC-352
Grand Total
1
2
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
7%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
1%
3
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
14%
0%
8%
33%
0%
15%
14%
0%
20%
11%
0%
0%
7%
8%
33%
45%
0%
21%
14%
73%
92%
67%
100%
46%
57%
50%
20%
23%
0%
0%
45%
4
92%
67%
55%
100%
79%
64%
27%
0%
0%
0%
38%
29%
50%
60%
63%
100%
100%
47%
Table 3 indicates the level of Exceptional Education candidate (N = 62) 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 candidates
are typically performing at average.
Table 3. Percent of Exceptional Education Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by KTS
Program
EXED
Unit-Wide
1
94%
94%
2
89%
95%
Kentucky Teacher Standards
4
5
6
7
98%
90%
85%
93%
94%
95%
93%
96%
3
91%
95%
8
100%
96%
9
97%
95%
10
100%
97%
*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 candidates (N = 16) who have scored 2
or lower (below proficiency) on critical performances during this academic year.
Table 4. Exceptional Education Candidates Scoring Below Proficient on CPs
Student ID
6271
3375
Score
1
Student Count
2
1
1
2
1
3
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 3 of 9
9042
7717
1091
1515
0532
3984
5406
5311
7469
3220
4138
1717
9597
5434
Grand Total
4
1
1
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
23
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
26
c. Clinical Experiences Data
The Exceptional Education program uses the following courses and experiences to evaluate
candidate dispositions: EDU 250, EXED 334, EXED 416, and EXED 490. The program has
identified the following courses and experiences where candidates report the diversity of their
field experiences: EXED 334 and EXED 416. EXED 334 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 candidates performed on dispositions as they
entered and progressed through their program (N = 16) and during their student teaching
experience (N = 12). Students are considered “proficient” who average at 3 or higher on each
disposition category.
Table 5. Exceptional Education Proficiency Rates on Unit-Wide Dispositions
Period
Prior to Student Teaching
During Student Teaching
Values
Learning
100%
92%
WKU Professional Education Dispositions
Values Personal
Values
Values
Values
Integrity
Diversity Collaboration
Professionalism
100%
---92%
100%
100%
100%
Over this academic year, Exceptional Education candidates (N = 7) reported demographic
information on 14 field placements with an average of 11% diversity (based on National Center
for Education Statistics). This diversity percentage meets 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.
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 4 of 9
Table 6. Percentages of Field Experience by Category Types
Physical
Disability
36%
Learning
Disability
93%
African American
79%
Working With Students With Special Needs
Mod/Sev
Visual
EBD
Gifted
ELL
Disability
Impair
43%
43%
21%
43%
0%
Hearing
Impair
29%
Working with Diverse Students
Native American
Latino/Hispanic
0%
64%
Develop
Delay
21%
Autism
36%
Asian American
57%
Overall, in 93% of their field experiences Exceptional Education candidates reported working
with at least one student with special needs and in 79% 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
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 candidates (N = 11).
Table 7. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates
Program
Exceptional Education
Unit-Wide
% Proficient
100%
89%
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 candidates who averaged at least 2.5 on the
indicators for each TWS Factor: CF – Contextual Factors, LG – Learning Goals, AP – Assessment
Plan, DFI – Design for Instruction, IDM – Instructional Decision Making, ASL – Analysis of
Student Learning, and RSE – Reflection and Self-Evaluation.
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 5 of 9
Table 8. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates of Exceptional Education Candidates
Program
EXED
Unit-Wide
CF
100%
86%
LG
100%
98%
Teacher Work Sample Components
AP
DFI
IDM
ASL
100%
100%
92%
100%
78%
95%
82%
78%
RSE
92%
75%
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.
Table 9. Percentage of Exceptional Education Candidates who “Passed” each Teacher Standard
Program
EXED
Unit-Wide
Kentucky Teacher Standards (Measured by TWS)
2
4
5
6
7
100%
92%
100%
83%
92%
93%
85%
77%
87%
76%
1
100%
94%
9
83%
76%
Additionally, all candidates are assessed during their student teaching experience using the
Student Teaching Evaluation form. Table 10 reports the percentages of Exceptional Education
student teachers (N = 12) 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 Proficiency Rates by Kentucky Teacher Standards
Program
EXED
Unit-Wide
1
100%
96%
2
92%
93%
3
100%
95%
Kentucky Teacher Standards
4
5
6
7
92%
92% 100% 100%
88%
88%
85%
88%
8
100%
92%
9
92%
93%
10
100%
87%
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 2007-08 academic year (the
most recent year with complete data). The last column allows for pass rate comparison of our
candidates to our 2006-07 results.
Table 11. Pass Rates on Content Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation
Program/Type of Assessment
SE STUDENTS W/MENTAL RETARDATION
EDUC. EXCEPTIONAL STUDENTS: CK
ED EXCEPT STUDENTS: MILD/MOD. DISAB.
ED EXCEPT STUDENTS: PROFND. DISAB.
Candidate N
(2007-08)
8
32
18
5
WKU Pass Rate
(2007-08)
88%
100%
94%
100%
WKU Pass Rate
(2006-07)
100%
100%
100%
--
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 6 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 2008-09 academic year, out of a possible 410 student
teachers 354 (86%) completed the survey; out of a possible 480 alumni, 106 (22%) completed
the survey. Below are the results for Exceptional Education student teachers and alumni, 21 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 survey
results.
Table 12. Average Scores on Teacher Standards Questions for EXED Respondents
Program
EXED
Unit-Wide
1
3.3
3.3
2
3.1
3.3
3
3.5
3.5
Kentucky Teacher Standards
4
5
6
7
3.2
3.1
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.3
3.2
8
3.2
3.0
9
3.1
3.3
10
3.1
3.0
Respondents were also able to provide comments if they answered “poor” for any item. Table
13 presents Exceptional Education respondent comments by years of experience (0 = Student
Teaching).
Table 13. Exceptional Education Respondent Comments
tch exp
0
0
3
Comments
I feel that it is a difficult task to prepare teachers, and the best way to prepare them is by letting them experience teaching on
their own. I do feel that we could have been better prepared in a lot of areas. I feel that there needs to be less paper work and
more hands on experience!
In regards to behavior management I feel that I was not prepared to teach, based on what I was taught during my two behavior
classes.
Need more instruction on planning for a diverse group with multiple levels of skill while keeping the standards in mind.
2. Summary of Results by Kentucky Teacher Standards and Other Key Conceptual Framework
Values
Candidates in the 2008-2009 graduating class in Exceptional Education LBD/MSD performed
well on the KY Teaching Standards and were consistently proficient in Kentucky Teacher
Standards and Critical Performance Indicator Scores. According to the assessment data
collected unit wide on performance on KY Teacher Standards, 2008-2009 Exceptional
Education teacher candidates performed above the unit wide average on 4 of the 10
standards. On 5 of the 10 standards, the percentage of candidates scoring proficient on
Critical Performances by KY Teacher Standards was lower than the unit wide percentage. On
1 of the 10 standards, the percentage of Exceptional Education candidates was equal to the
unit wide percentage. Areas in which the Exceptional Education candidates performed
below the unit wide averages were in Designing and Planning Instruction; Maintaining
Learning Climate; Assessment/Evaluation; Technology; and Reflection. It should be noted
that there are many more students in other areas of Teacher Education than in Exceptional
Education. This means that only a very few students performing poorly puts our
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 7 of 9
percentages at a lower level below the unit wide averages easily in most cases. There are
some conflicting conclusions to be made using only the data collected unit wide. For
example, Exceptional Education candidates were overwhelmingly performing above the unit
wide percentages if looking at data from Table 8 (TWS Proficiency Rates); Table 9
(Percentage of Candidates who “passed” each teacher standard) and Table 10 (Proficiency
rates by Ky Teacher Standards). However, if looking at the data from Table 3 (Percentage of
candidates scoring proficient on Critical Performances by Kentucky Teacher Standards), our
students scored below the unit wide percentages in 5 out of 9 standards. Contrary to Table
3 data, on the same 5 standards in Tables 9 and 10 our candidates performed above the
unit wide percentages on those same standards. On all of the TWS indicators shown on
Table 8, our candidates were above the unit wide rates in 7 out of 7 indicators. Several
explanations for this discrepancy are plausible. First, the variation of faculty and staff
scoring the different performances may indicate a problem with reliability of scoring the
standards. Second, the critical performances may be flawed in that they are not truly
assessing the standards intended. A third possible explanation may be that students
improved their performance with time and became proficient throughout the course of
their program on the standards that were, previously, below unit wide percentages. That
being said, there was only one standard that was consistently below the unit wide
percentages: Standard 2: Designs and Plans Instruction, (Table 3 and Table 10). It is believed
that the lower averages in designing and planning instruction may be explained by the fact
that personnel who do not have extensive experience in special education classrooms often
supervise student teachers in the special education program. Because of this fact, the
assessment of student skills in designing and planning instruction may not be based upon
what is appropriate and best practice in a classroom serving students with moderate to
severe disabilities.
The Exceptional Education program at WKU is strong in providing students with
opportunities to work with students in diverse environments and requires field experience
hours that is far above other programs in the state and region. Before our candidates begin
student teaching, they have logged well over 300 hours in the field in a variety of settings
including those serving children with Learning and Behavior Disorders, Moderate and
Severe Disabilities, Collaborative Inclusive Classrooms, Clinical Settings, Early Childhood
Settings, and Alternative Educational Settings. As evidenced by the data in Table 6, our
students are provided opportunities to observe and/or work directly with children with a
variety of disabilities and ethnicities. It is believed that this is a clear strength of our
program.
Another strength of our program is the dispositions displayed by our candidates by the time
they reach student teaching. The Exceptional Education faculty believes that
professionalism and ethical practice are a priority and these dispositions are emphasized
and taught in all classes, in particular in field experience courses. Our disposition ratings
(Table 5) are a reflection of this emphasis.
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 8 of 9
If evaluating our program through the Praxis II scores of teacher candidates (Table 11), our
2007-2008 scores are varied according to which of the three test’s data is examined. For the
Core Knowledge for Exceptional Education (0353), 100% of our 07-08 graduates passed on
the first attempt. For the Mild/Moderate Disabilities test (0542), 94% of graduates passed
on the first attempt. For the Severe/Profound test (0544), 100% of graduates passed on the
first attempt.
3. Efforts to Report and Disseminate Results
An Exceptional Education coordinator was appointed and program faculty members were
involved in reviewing the data. Each Exceptional Education faculty member examined the
data and made suggestions as to how to improve the program. Informal discussions were
held among Exceptional Education members. Final results will be shared with the School of
Education and the college.
The School of Teacher Education faculty members meet on a regular basis each semester of
the academic year to review and analyze program area assessment results. Generally, the
faculty is responsible for examining data from within their respective classes, especially
critical performances, to complete a Unit Action Plan. The Unit Action Plan relates to NCATE
documents. All reports are usually reviewed by the elementary faculty before submitting to
the department head and other responsible parties within the college and university. Each
year, program assessment data is reviewed and evaluated for information which warrants
program changes and course modification.
4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results
a. Assessment or Data Collection Changes Based on Assessment Results
It is believed that some of the areas that appear as weaknesses according to the Unit
Wide data may not be reflective of other indicators of program evaluation such as
student reports, intern observations etc. Changes that should be made include making
sure all data is reported accurately by the program and that Disposition ratings be
collected more frequently rather than just at student teaching. Other areas in the unit
collect disposition ratings at certain points prior to student teaching and the Exceptional
Education program should begin this as well. In addition, the program will continue to
collect data on pass rates of individual tests to determine the need for curriculum
changes.
b. Program Curriculum or Experiences Changes Based on Assessment Results
Due to assessment results along with changes required of special education teachers in
the field, it will be proposed that the faculty begin to research revising the program to
better serve our students, their future students, and the districts that hire them.
EXED IP Undergraduate APR 2008-09 Page 9 of 9
c. Decisions about Group/Individual Student Progress Based on Assessment Results
Students not meeting proficiencies based upon Critical Performances in individual
courses need to be targeted at an earlier point in their program. Students not meeting
proficiencies prior to student teaching may be provided with remediation and personal
mentoring to bring them up to the proficient levels required.