(EDF 670) Critical Issues in Special Education
Common Course Assessments: Research Paper
(EDF 670) Critical Issues in Education
Common Course Assessment: Research Paper
Common Course Standards:
Special Education Standard #1: Foundations
Knowledge:
 Laws and policies for general and special education. (SA1K1)
 Evolution of laws and policies that impact the lives of individuals with exceptionalities
and their families from birth through adulthood. (SA1K2)
 Political and economic issues that affect policy development. (SA1K3)
 Research related to educational change. (SA1K8)
 Human resources management, recruitment, personnel assistance and development,
and evaluation. (SA1K10)
 Sources of funding (SA1K11)
 Laws and policies governing the discipline of all students and implications for
individuals with exceptional learning needs. (SA1K12)
 Legal and ethical issues of behavior management of individuals with exceptional
learning needs. (SA1K13)
Special Education Standard #8: Assessment
Skills:
 Advocate for the participation of individuals with exceptional learning needs in
accountability systems. (SA8S1)
 Implement procedures within the assessment accountability system to ensure the
participation of individuals with exceptional earning needs (SA8S2)
 Develop and implement ongoing evaluations of special education programs and
practices. (SA8S3)
Special Education Standard #9: Professional and Ethical Practice
Skills:
 Advocate for individuals with exceptional learning needs and their families. (SA9S2)
 Respect and support individuals with exceptional learning needs in self-advocacy.
(SA9S3)
Special Education Standard #10: Collaboration
Knowledge:
 Approaches for involving parents, family, and community members in educational
planning, implementation, and evaluation. (SA10K1)
 Role of parent and advocacy organizations as they support individuals with
exceptionalities and their families. (SA10K2)
Skills:
 Develop and implement intra- and interagency agreements that create programs
with shared responsibility for individuals with exceptional learning needs. (SA10S1)
 Promote seamless transitions of individuals with exceptional learning needs across
educational and other programs from birth through adulthood. (SA10S2)



Implement administrative procedures to ensure clear communication among
administrators, instructional staff and related service personnel. (SA10S3)
Engage in shared decision making to support programs for individuals with
exceptional learning needs. (SA10S5)
Consult and collaborate in administrative and instructional settings. (SS10S7)
Directions to the Student: This assessment requires the candidate to prepare a research
based report identifying a special education issue with substantiating data, the related
research addressing the issue, and a description of how to address the issue based on best
practice. Students are expected to construct an informed position through the review with
an analysis and critique of the literature, using appropriate APA style citation.
Rubric for Research Paper
Distinguished
(3)
Proficient
Progressing
(2)
(1)
Issue
Identification
Issue is
thoroughly and
succinctly stated,
has clear
relevance and
timely significance
to school
context(s).
Issue is
adequately stated
but may lack
conciseness, is
relatively well
focused and has
relevance to
school context(s).
Issue is
insufficiently or
incompletely
stated, imprecisely
focused (i.e.,
inadequately
orients the
reader), and has
limited or
questionable
relevance or
significant to
school context(s).
Issue is not
appropriate or has
substantiating
information to
justify the issue.
Summary and
Analysis
Extensively/thorou
ghly analyzes
literature/research
as it relates
directly to the
issue. Includes
multiple and
contending
perspectives.
Analysis is
protracted and
substantive.
Effectively
contests
contending
perspectives.
Identifies obvious
gaps in
literature/research
.
Inclusive of a
range of relevant
multiple and
contending
perspectives.
Analysis is not
only more
protracted and
substantive, but
also includes
attempts at
contesting some
of those
contending
perspectives (i.e.,
more than mere
disagreement with
them).
Includes
limited/indistingui
shable
perspectives from
the
literature/research
, none of which
are contending
(i.e., builds the
case in support
only), and/or
analysis is narrow
or superficial in
scope.
There are no
indistinguishable
perspectives from
the
literature/research
, none of which
are contending
(i.e., builds the
case in support
only), and/or
analysis is narrow
or superficial in
scope.
Conclusions
and
Conclusions &
Recommendations
Conclusions &
Recommendations
Conclusions &
Recommendations
Conclusions and
Recommendations
Elements
Unsatisfactory
(0)
Recommendat
ions
(C/R) are not only
logically derived
from the evidence,
but are thorough
and compelling.
There is no
incongruence or
unstated
assumptions.
Position is well
developed,
reasoned and
defended. There
are no logical
fallacies.
(C/R) derive quite
logically from the
evidence. There is
no incongruence
with the evidence.
They contain no
unstated
assumptions.
Position is
adequately
developed and
defended. There
are no logical
fallacies.
(C/R) are weak
based on
limited/insufficient
evidence. Position
is poorly
developed and
inadequately
defended. C/R
may be
occasionally
incongruent with
the evidence
and/or contain
incorrect or
unstated
assumptions.
Some logical
fallacies may be
present.
are not relevant to
the special
education issue.
Expression
Clear, articulate,
and succinct
expression. No
redundancy of
argument.
Hierarchical
development of
reasoning (i.e.,
argument builds
logically; orderly
presentation of
ideas). Smooth
transitions. Devoid
of jargon or
colloquialisms.
Coherent and
clear expression.
Occasional
wordiness. Rare
redundancy of
argument.
Hierarchical
development of
reasoning (i.e.,
entire argument
builds logically;
presentation of
ideas is ordered).
Smooth
transitions. No
contradictory
conclusions or
recommendations.
Rare use of jargon
or colloquialisms.
Rare lapses in
coherence (i.e.,
occasional unclear
meaning).
Wordiness-tendency toward
redundancy of
argument (i.e.,
uneconomical in
expression).
Limited
hierarchical
development of
reasoning (i.e.,
entire argument
does not build
logically—only
portions do;
presentation of
ideas lacks
sufficient order).
Awkward
transitions
between ideas
and/or rare
contradictory
conclusions or
recommendations.
Occasional use of
jargon or
colloquialisms.
The information
provided is not
presented in the
required format or
articulated in an
understandable
manner.
Structure
No sentence
fragment or
sentence run-on
errors, or other
grammatical
No sentence
fragment or
sentence run-on
errors. Other
grammatical
Several
grammatical
errors (e.g.,
sentence
fragments or
The information
presented does
not reflect
university level
work as it related
errors, or spelling
errors.
Presentation
conforms to APA
guidelines (i.e.,
rare citation
error).
errors are rare as
are spelling errors.
Presentation
conforms mostly
to APA guidelines
(i.e., infrequent
citation errors).
sentence run-ons;
subject-verb
agreement; nounpronoun
antecedent) as
well as spelling
errors.
Presentation
conforms poorly to
APA guidelines
(i.e., numerous
citation errors).
to grammar,
punctuation, and
APA style.