1.4.e.7 Special Education Advanced M. Ed. (Candidates already licensed in special education)
This is a new program, in its first year of full implementation. As such, some assessments do not yet have
data.
Assessment: Content Knowledge
Description of Assessment: Grades in core coursework
Alignment with National Board for the Professional Teaching Standards Principles:
Course
Partnerships and
Collaboration
Advanced Assistive
Technology and
Universal Design
for Learning
Advanced
Strategies in
Special Education
Transitional
Strategies for
Individuals with
Disabilities
Masters' Project
Description
Participants will become familiar with the philosophical bases and practical
application of interacting collaboratively with colleagues, parents, community
members, other professionals, and learners. The course provides an in depth
analysis of the concepts and issues related to the schooling, learning, and
instruction of individuals who experience significant disabilities.
Using an ecological approach, this course expands foundational knowledge of
assistive technology, Universal Design (UD), and Universal Design for Learning
(UDL) to focus on current practices, considerations, barriers, and emerging
research themes across the lifespan continuum. The course will cover legal
requirements of AT in IDEA settings, provide overview of humanfactors/performance assessment, technology abandonment and curriculum
integration, funding, and technology outcomes measures. Time will be spent
facilitating understanding the relationship among AT, UDL, and scientifically
based instructional practices. Students will have hands-on experience
establishing AT or UDL outcome measures.
This course is designed for masters students enrolled in the online special
education masters program. This course covers (a) advanced instructional
strategies and curricular planning for children and youth with exceptionalities
and (b) advanced methods in providing instructional best practices to the
heterogeneous groups of students found in general education contexts.
This course provides an introduction to historical and contemporary
legislation, policies, methods, and service delivery for educational and
transitional programming for students with disabilities. The course is
designed to equip educators with the ability to plan and implement successful
transitional life experiences for all students and students with disabilities.
The course content focuses on the concept of transition as a lifelong process
and emphasis on content topics including: theoretical and conceptual
models, quality of life, family issues, person-centered planning, selfdetermination, identifying appropriate formal and informal transition
assessments and incorporating assessments into IEP planning, and major
approaches for providing services and supports through collaboration with
other educational and community agencies involved in the transition
process.
Master’s project guidance is an online seminar completed during a
candidate’s final year in the program. This seminar facilitates participants’
development of skills related to critical self-reflection as individuals and as
professional educators. The purpose of project guidance is to support
candidates in generating a research validated (evidence-based) project that
NBPTS
Propositions
Proposition 5:
Teachers are
members of
learning
communities.
Proposition 3:
Teachers are
responsible for
managing and
monitoring
student learning.
Proposition 1:
Teachers are
committed to
students and
their learning
Proposition 2:
Teachers know
the subjects they
teach and how
to teach those
subjects
Proposition 3:
Teachers are
responsible for
managing and
monitoring
supports the academic, life-skill, occupational, and/or social/emotional
development of students. The design of the master’s project is to produce a
well organized literature review reporting on the current status of literaturebased knowledge about a topic. Candidates implement and collect data on
their evidence-based practices in a classroom or service-delivery context. The
teacher candidates build the necessary skills to conduct an applied evidencebased mater’s project. The project is a culminating work of the master’s
program.
student learning.
Proposition 4:
Teachers think
systematically
about their
practice and
learn from
experience.
Analysis and Interpretation of Data: In that this is a new program, data are difficult to interpret. The
single F is troublesome, and we’ll try to maintain rigor.
Data:
2010-2011 Academic Year
Course Title
Partnerships and Collaboration
Advanced Assistive Technology and Universal Design
for Learning
Advanced Strategies in Special Education
Transitional Strategies for Individuals with Disabilities
Masters' Project
A
6 (85.7%)
5 (71.4%)
B
1 (14.3%)
C+
1 (14.3%)
F
1 (14.3%)
5 (100%)
4 (100%)
Not yet implemented
Assessment: Planning
Prompt
Student
Information: Describe
your student and
instructional setting
Strategy Rationale: Why
did you pick this strategy?
Candidate Performance Level
Proficient: Description of the class, school, and student(s) is clearly
articulated; student information includes IEP goal(s) specifically aligned
with the chosen strategy
Developing: Description of the class, school, and students is general; IEP
goals are not discussed in detail or are not aligned well with the
strategy
Unacceptable: Student information is general, no reference to IEP
goals, and/or demonstrates bias and limiting language
Proficient: Rationale for using this strategy includes at least 5-7 peerreviewed sources related to the strategy. Advantages and
disadvantages of the strategy as well as empirical reasons for using the
strategy are clearly articulated.
Developing: Rationale for using this strategy includes fewer than 5
peer-reviewed sources related to the strategy. Reasons for choosing the
strategy based on limited or no empirical evidence.
Unacceptable: Rational not provided or is based on opinion rather than
evidence.
2012
16 100%
0
0%
0
0%
8
50%
7
44%
1
6%
Methods: Detailed
description of the methods
that occurred during your
application of the strategy
Proficient: All steps of the strategy are implemented and clearly
described as taught in class (i.e., describe, model, guided practice,
independent practice, generalization).
Developing: Strategy is not implemented through generalization
and/or described in limited detail
Unacceptable: Steps of strategy instruction as described in class not
utilized or provided.
Total
14
88%
0
0%
2
13%
16
Assessment: Performance in the Field
Prompt
Description of how
the students achieved
using the strategy
Reflection: How do
you think this strategy
worked? What have
you done to adapt this
strategy?
Candidate Performance Level
Proficient: Data clearly showcase how the student(s) (1) learned
the strategy steps (e.g., observation of student, student work
samples, etc), (2) mastered a skill with the use of the strategy:
pretest/posttest and other data collected as part of your strategy
instruction.
Developing: Data focused on either strategy mastery or skill
mastery. Limited data provided to demonstrate either strategy or
skill mastery
2012
11
61%
6
33%
Unacceptable: Data is disorganized, difficult to interpret, and/or
does not address an academic skill.
Proficient: Reflection addressed ways in which the strategy was
adapted to meet the needs of the student(s), whether or not you
like this strategy personally and provide a rationale for your
professional opinion.
1
6%
14
78%
2
11%
2
11%
18
100%
Acceptable: Limited reflection offered about implementing the
strategy. Not all questions are answered.
Unacceptable: Reflection is missing or does not address the
questions.
Total
Assessment: Literature Review - This assessment has not yet been implemented
MCs are committed to students and their learning
Proficient: The MC identified an area to study that is of significance to the student’s academic
growth and/or self concept. The literature review (including purpose and research questions) clearly
demonstrates a committee to student learning and a belief that all students can learn by selecting an
intervention that aligns with/accounts for individual student needs, backgrounds, and
Developing: Research questions are related to student needs; demonstrates some commitment to
the least restrictive assumption but language may allude to student as problem; considerations of
cultural and family needs superficially or not addressed
Unacceptable: Language communicates biases and dangerous assumptions about students; study
question is related to teacher rather than student needs; does not use person first language
NBPTS: MC know the subjects they teach and how to teach these to the students NCATE: Candidates
in advanced programs for teachers have an in-depth knowledge of the content that they teach.
Proficient: The method section of the paper demonstrates a deep understanding of the history and
real world application of the subject the MC is teaching. The intervention procedure demonstrates an
understanding of the skills and needs the students with whom the MC is working
Developing: Method includes some information about the history and application of the content;
interventions may be somewhat functional or related to basic understanding of the student needs;
rationale is limited and provides only some references to the research context
Unacceptable Method includes few references to the historical context of the content; content is
related to isolated or splinter skills; skills and needs of students are not the focus of the intervention
NBPTS: MCs are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning NCATE: able to select
and use a broad range of instructional strategies that promote student learning.
Proficient: The MC designs an intervention that meets instructional goals, and will keep students
engaged and focused.
Developing: Intervention somewhat engages students, and is somewhat aligned with instructional
goals. Fidelity measures are simplistic and too infrequent to be effective
Unacceptable Intervention is grounded in passive learning and is not of interest or engaging to
students; fidelity is not addressed
MC thinks systematically about their practice and learns from experience; NCATE: candidates in
advanced programs for teachers synthesize research and policies that impact their work.
Proficient: MC read and question the research related to their stated research question as by clearly
writing and organizing the literature review. The MC synthesized the research presented in the articles
in a succinct and systematic way; The MC design a systematic study based on their research/review of
the literature; the study design allows the MC to answer the research question.
Developing: Organization is adequate, but additional transitions, headings, and connections may
help clarity; literature is minimally integrated, with some “listing” rather than integration and analysis of
studies; design is related to review but simplistic in design
Unacceptable : Paper appears to be a disconnected listing of various research results/reports; design
does not flow from literature
MCs are members of learning communities.
Proficient: Provide feedback to group members by making comments or asking questions in
response to his/her post
Developing: Provided some feedback to peers, but feedback is superficial.
Unacceptable : Did not provide feedback to another group members
Comments
Assessment: Master’s Project and Collaboration This assessment has not yet been implemented.
Peer Editing Rubric
Unacceptable: Critique provides little information about what was done well and what could have
been improved.
Developing: Critique provides some information about what was done well and what could have
been improved, but does not move beyond listing information
Proficient: Critique is meaningful, provides insights to the author, and clearly explains what was
done well and how areas could be improved, provides information that could be included in the final
reflection
Peer Editing Rubric
Unacceptable: Comments are single words (OK, wow, fine)
Developing: Comments are short, and only provide some information
Proficient: Comments are thorough, detailed, and use professional language
Peer Editing Rubric
Unacceptable: Critique lists what is wrong and provides little insight, has negative tone
Developing: Critique gives some examples of strength and weaknesses that could help the author,
has neutral tone
Proficient: Critique asks probing questions, provides clear direction for improvement, ends with a
positive comment
Abstract Rubric
Unacceptable: Abstract is vague and provides few key words; includes none or few of the switches
identified by Shank & Brown
Developing: Abstract includes fair amount of information and mentions key words; includes several
of the aspects of the article
Proficient: Abstract is brief, comprehensive summary; dense with information and embeds key
words;serves as the front door of the project; includes Shank & Brown's seven switches that constitute a
miniature model of the article: purpose, problem, participants, design, analysis, results, and conclusions
Abstract Rubric
Unacceptable: Abstract exceeds 150 words or is less than 100 words; rambles, complex sentences
difficult to follow; tense changes several times
Developing: Abstract between 100 and 150 words; fairly readable in simple sentences; tense may at
times be inconsistent, passive voice used occasionally
Proficient: Abstract is concise and uses between 100 and 150 words; coherent, readable, simple
sentences, using active voice, written in past tense
Abstract Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Results Rubric
Unacceptable: no data reported or data listed without summary and analysis; reports insufficient or
not linked to conclusions
Developing: data is summarized and analyzed is some form; results may be linked but not sufficient
to justify conclusions
Proficient: Results summarized the collected data and the analysis performed on those data; results
are sufficient to justify conclusions
Results Rubric
Unacceptable: only some results reported; uncomfortable data avoided; no mention of raw data
Developing: Relevant results are mentioned, though information about those running counter to
expectations are limited; raw data may be mentioned; results section wanders into implications
Proficient: All relevant results are mentioned, including those that run counter to expectations. It
does not hid uncomfortable findings. The results section notes that raw data is available on
supplemental or on-line archives. The results section avoids discussing implications.
Results Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Discussion Rubric
Unacceptable: No reference to hypothesis, implications not related to hypothesis or vague, difficult
to follow references
Developing: Hypothesis is mentioned, and if unsupported some explanation provided; implications
mentioned, but may not include all three aspects of examination, interpretation, and drawing inferences
Proficient: discussion opens with a clear statement of support or nonsupport of the original
hypothesis; if unsupported a post hoc explanation is offered; evaluates and interprets implications in
light of the original hypothesis; includes examination, interpretation, and drawing of inferences and
conclusions.
Discussion Rubric
Unacceptable: little or no mention of other results or contribution to the readers' understanding
Developing: Some mention of results of others to clarify conclusions; not simply a restatement; nw
statements add to reader's understanding
Proficient: similarities and differences between the results and the work of others is used to
contextualize, confirm, and clarify the conclusions. It does not simply repeat or restate what has already
been said. Each new statement contributes to the interpretations and to the reader's understanding of
the problem.
Discussion Rubric
Unacceptable: little or no mention of other results or contribution to the readers' understanding
Developing: Some mention of results of others to clarify conclusions; not simply a restatement; nw
statements add to reader's understanding
Proficient: similarities and differences between the results and the work of others is used to
contextualize, confirm, and clarify the conclusions. It does not simply repeat or restate what has already
been said. Each new statement contributes to the interpretations and to the reader's understanding of
the problem.
Discussion Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Limitations of Project Rubric
Unacceptable: Little or no reference to sources of potential bias and threats to validity, problems
with measures or effect size; little or no description of implications of the intervention
Developing: some discussion of potential bias, ma refer to some of these components: internal
validity, imprecision of measures, effect size, or other weaknesses or limitations of the project; glides
over barriers to implementations of the intervention
Proficient: limitations statement takes into account sources of potential bias or other threats to
internal validity, imprecision of measures, effect size, or other weaknesses or limitations of the project;
barriers to implementation of the intervention are discussed
Limitations of the Project Rubric
Unacceptable: little or no reference (or confused reference) to fidelity of study; limited or no
alternative explanations
Developing: some attention to fidelity to the intervention; some reference to alternative
explanations or the inability to generalize
Proficient: Discusses fidelity to the intervention; addresses alternative explanations or the inability
to generalize or apply to other situations, limites on the length of time, or other setting specific items of
the context.
Limitations of the Project Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the
management plan and its components
Implications of the Project Rubric
Unacceptable: little or no reference to importance of the prblem or other issues
Developing: provides a commentary on the importance of the findings and larger issues; some
discussion of what was confirmed or disconfirmed
Proficient: Discussion section ends with a reasoned and justifiable commentary on the importance
of the projects findings by emphasizing the importance of the problem, other lager issues; discussion
states what propositions are confirmed or discomfirmed
Implications of the Project Rubric
Unacceptable:: little or no discussion of theoretical, clinical, or practical significance of the
outcomes; little or no mention of what problems remain unresolved or emerged
Developing: considers significant of the outcomes in one or more of these areas: theoretical, clinical, practical; some
reference to the basis of those inclusions; mentions unresolved issues
Proficient: considered the theoretical, clinical, or practical significant of the outcomes and the basis for those
interpretations; addresses what problems remain unresolved or are new problems based on this project
Implications of Project Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan and its
components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan and its
components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan and its
components
References
Developing: not demonstrated
Developing: demonstrated
or inconsistently
some or most of the time
demonstrated
Proficient: Consistently
demonstrated
References Acknowledges
Acknowledges the work of
Acknowledges the work of
Acknowledges the work of the work of previous scholars previous scholars and provides previous scholars and provides
previous scholars and provides and provides a reliable way to a reliable way to locate it
a reliable way to locate it
locate it Developing: not
a reliable way to locate it
Developing: demonstrated
Proficient: Consistently
demonstrated or inconsistently
some or most of the time
demonstrated
demonstrated
References document
statements made about the
literature just as data support
interpretations and
conclusions
References References
document statements made
about the literature just as
data support interpretations
and conclusions Developing:
not demonstrated or
inconsistently demonstrated
References document
References document
statements made about the
statements made about the
literature just as data support literature just as data support
interpretations and conclusions interpretations and conclusions
Developing: demonstrated
Proficient: Consistently
some or most of the time
demonstrated
References Uses standard
Uses standard procedures
Uses standard procedures for procedures for citations, are for citations, are accurate,
citations, are accurate,
accurate, complete, and useful complete, and useful
complete, and useful
Developing: not demonstrated Developing: demonstrated
or inconsistently demonstrated some or most of the time
References are double spaced
and use a hanging indent
format. References are on a
new page, on which the word
references appears in upper
and lowercase letters,
centered
References Project Rubric
Uses standard procedures
for citations, are accurate,
complete, and useful
Proficient: Consistently
demonstrated
References References are
References are double
References are double
double spaced and use a
spaced and use a hanging
spaced and use a hanging
hanging indent format.
indent format. References are
indent format. References are
References are on a new page, on a new page, on which the
on a new page, on which the
on which the word references word references appears in
word references appears in
appears in upper and
upper and lowercase letters,
upper and lowercase letters,
lowercase letters, centered
centered Developing:
centered Proficient:
Developing: not demonstrated demonstrated some or most of
Consistently demonstrated
or inconsistently demonstrated the time
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management
plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan
and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan and
its components
Appendices and Supplemental Materials Rubric
Unacceptable: distracting and inappropriate material is provided in the body of the text
Developing: appendix is included, but some distracting information remains in the text
Proficient: appendix is included for materials that would be distracting or inappropriate in the body of the
text; examples of included items are lists, complex descriptions of a procedures, detailed demographic description,
oversized tables, some data sets, and some figures
Appendices and Supplemental Materials Rubric
Unacceptable: no evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management
plan and its components
Developing: vague or unclear plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan
and its components
Proficient: Evidence of a plan to have a peer or practicing teacher read and critique the management plan and
its components
Final Reflection
Unacceptable: missing or difficult to follow; may not address all prompts, either shorter than 3 or longer than
5 pages
Developing: readable and appropriate length, addresses at least two prompts adequately
Proficient: The final essay is well written and contains 3-5 pages; addresses three of the prompts provided.