BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
PO BOX 6000
BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000
(607) 777-2727
(607) 777-3587 FAX
Dear Graduate Student:
Candidates for MSEd degrees in Special Education will, during their last semester, present a
Graduation Portfolio that demonstrates competence as a Special Education Teacher. Students
are urged to start preparing their Portfolio early and continue throughout their graduate program,
to ensure opportunities to select representative pieces of their best work. Guidelines for the
Graduation Portfolio are attached.
During the last semester of their graduate program, students will file a Declaration of Candidacy
with the Graduate School and notify the School of Education of intent to submit the Portfolio.
Portfolio dues dates for the academic year are posted on the SOE website. Portfolios must be
submitted to the Teacher Education Office by the specified date. NO extensions can be given.
Each portfolio will be reviewed independently by two or more faculty members, using the
Portfolio Evaluation Form and Rubrics (attached). Ratings of the two reviewers will be
compiled. Any competency rated as 2 or 1 by both reviewers will be “failed” and the
competency must be revised. If the reviewers disagree about whether a competency has been
failed, it will be reviewed by a third faculty member and the majority opinion will prevail. In the
event that any competency has been failed, the student will be contacted immediately to devise a
plan for improvement.
Students may pick up their portfolios, with copies of the evaluations, in the Teacher Education
Office after results are posted each semester.
The Graduation Portfolio is intended to be an authentic assessment of each student’s competence
as a well-rounded teacher, and to reflect knowledge and skill developed while a graduate student.
Therefore, assignments completed for coursework, with instructor comments, are expected to be
central to the portfolio.
Best wishes as you develop your portfolio.
Sincerely,
The Special Education Faculty
Attachments
Effective Fall 2011
Special Education Graduation Portfolio Evaluation
Student:
Reviewer:
1
1
1
1
1
Quality
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
Date:
Comments
Table of Contents
Credentials
Guide & Organization
Confidentiality
Theory, Research, &
Legal Foundations
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
5
5
5
Reflection on Practice
0 1 2 3 4 5
Diversity
0 1 2 3 4 5
Collaboration with
Staff
0 1 2 3 4 5
Collaboration with
Families
0 1 2 3 4 5
Least Restrictive
Environment
0 1 2 3 4 5
Formal Assessment &
IEP Development
0 1 2 3 4 5
Instruction & CBA
0 1 2 3 4 5
Positive Behavior
Supports
0 1 2 3 4 5
Special Education
Technology
0 1 2 3 4 5
Overall Assessment and Recommendation:
2
Guidelines for Portfolio Assessment
Introductory Materials
Start the portfolio with:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Table of Contents
Credentials: Provide a current resume; copy of TEACH file; list of courses, instructors,
and grades for graduate work at Binghamton; and Fieldwork Logs for each semester.
Guide to the Portfolio: As a professional educator, you will routinely define the proper
scope and form of your activities. In accordance with that disposition, the format and
specific content of this portfolio are up to you. There are many “right” ways to organize
it; what is important is that you have an orderly way to present your materials and that
you explain your schema to the reviewers. You might make the case that one material
demonstrates several competencies, or there may be specific items for each competency.
Confidentiality: Make an explicit statement that, in accordance with privacy laws and
professional dispositions, you have protected the identity of students with disabilities and
their families by using pseudonyms and/or deleting all personal information (e.g., last
name, address).
Competencies
Include or demonstrate all of the following, using APA Style:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Recent theory, research, and law that guide and support your practice
Critical reflection on your practice
Teacher awareness of and responsiveness to cultural diversity, including diversity in race,
social class, and gender
Successful collaboration with general education teacher(s) and/or related service
provider(s)
Successful collaboration (i.e., equal partnerships) with families
Least Restrictive Environment
Formal assessment and IEP development for an individual student whom you have taught
Individualized instruction of mixed ability group, with lesson plan and video of teaching
Positive behavioral intervention to address a target behavior exhibited by an individual
student
Special education technology
Note: Throughout your entire portfolio, you must make clear and explicit connections among
foundations (theory/research/law), evidence of your practice (usually with artifacts), and critical
reflections on practice.
3
The Integration of Theory, Research, and/or Legal Foundations
Effective teachers actively use relevant theory, research, and/or laws as their foundation for
teaching practices. Students must be able to demonstrate in their portfolio that their critical
thinking and teaching practices are grounded in current research and theory literature in
education, related social sciences, as well as state/federal law. This is accomplished through
critical reflection and integration of published theory, research, and law as they relate to your
own thought and practice.
This competency will be evaluated based on the entire portfolio, not based on unrelated entries
designated as “Theory/Research/Law.” In your Guide(s) however, it is helpful to specifically
describe how this competency has been addressed.
All references to published theory, research, and law must follow APA style for citation and
appropriate use of sources. Including copies of published theory/research (e.g., journal articles)
or laws in the portfolio is highly discouraged, as it demonstrates neither understanding nor
integration into your practice and may actually distract from other, more relevant entries.
We expect to see references to articles and books that delve into topics, and legal materials that
were required readings for your courses. You also will need to supplement these sources with
more recent works (e.g., most recent edition of IDEA, current research articles).
Scoring:
5 =
All portfolio competencies are well supported by current and broadly accepted theory,
research and/or law, and demonstrate a logical extension of research. The portfolio may
contribute new knowledge about teaching/learning. All three areas of foundation (i.e.,
theory, research, law) are addressed for most competencies.
4 =
Most portfolio entries include and are well-documented by references to broadly accepted
theory, research, and law. Research paper(s) shows ability to do in-depth study and
analysis of a particular topic. At least two of three areas of foundation (i.e., theory,
research, law) are addressed for most competencies.
3 =
Most items of the portfolio are explicitly supported by discussion of related theory,
research, and/or law (at least one area of foundation for each competency).
2 =
Research, theory, or law is only loosely or randomly cited with only partial relevance to
portfolio entries.
1 =
No relationship between practice and theory/research/law is apparent or explicit.
0 =
Competency not addressed.
4
Reflection on Practice
Reflection involves critical thinking about learning and experience, and leads to evolution in
thought and practice. For example, a teacher’s understandings of theories, research, or
regulations may change because of new materials read, course discussions, conversations with
families of students with disabilities and school staff, and teaching experiences. A practicum
student may understand underlying principles, use strategies, or interpret results in ways that
differ from an earlier semester. Additionally, critical reflection involves devising a plan for
incorporating new knowledge into future teaching. The difference between a well-organized
work folder and a portfolio is critical reflection on your work, as demonstrated by articulation of
insights and resulting changes in knowledge, attitudes, and/or practice during your graduate
studies.
Scoring:
5 =
All competencies include critical reflections related to the underlying theory/research/law
and the associated practices. Insights and growing understanding of best practices are
evident. The reflections demonstrate personal and professional growth, as well as
foresight into future practice. The reflections demonstrate a deepening and improvement
in understanding and practice over time, and provide insight into the student’s thinking as
ideas and practices developed.
4 =
Reflection is evident in most competencies, with connections among foundations
(theory/research/law), fieldwork, practice, and personal and professional development;
some discussion of how learning will inform/change future practice.
3 =
Reflection is evident in most competencies, with connections among foundations,
fieldwork, practice, and/or personal and professional development, little discussion of
how learning will be applied to future practice.
2 =
Little reflection is evident in most competencies and, when provided, focuses primarily
on what was learned in coursework with little connection to fieldwork, practice,
foundations, and personal and professional development OR focused on practice without
connection to foundations.
1 =
Little discussion of change and development in understanding or practice over time.
0 =
Competency not addressed.
5
Diversity
Awareness and responsiveness to diversity in race, class, gender, culture and language are
essential to becoming an effective teacher. Although these issues impact on all aspects of
education, they have particular relevance to educators working with children identified as having
special educational needs. This item requires documentation that identifies and addresses issues
of diversity and their specific relationship to special education.
Note: Ability/Disability is an aspect of diversity, but that is what defines Special Education.
This competency must address other aspects of diversity as they relate to
ability/disability.
Scoring:
5=
Discussion of two or more issues related to diversity and their specific relationship to the
education of children with special educational needs; in-depth explanation of this
relationship that includes citation of theoretical literature and research; description of one
or more practices you have used that address these concerns, with critical reflection on
both theory and practice.
4=
Discussion of one specific issue related to diversity and its specific relationship to the
education of children with special educational needs, with in-depth explanation of this
relationship that includes citation of theoretical literature or research. Description of one
or more practices you have used, observed and/or read about that address these concerns,
with critical reflection on these issues.
3=
Discussion of one specific issue related to diversity and its specific relationship to the
education of children with special educational needs, with citation of either theoretical
literature or research. Description of a practice you have used, observed and/or read about
that addresses these concerns.
2=
Identification of an issue related to diversity and its specific relationship to the education
of children with special educational needs.
1=
Identification of an issue related to diversity and education, but no action taken and/or
discussion reflects stereotypes/prejudices.
0=
Competency not addressed.
6
Collaboration with Staff
Successful collaboration with other teachers, school staff, community service providers and/or
related service provider(s) is essential for a well-coordinated, student-centered educational
program. Collaboration involves communication about student performance and instructional
strategies, collaborative lesson planning, role release, and cooperative or team teaching.
Although formal arrangements (e.g., scheduled team meetings, co-teaching assignments) support
collaboration, intentional collaboration also occurs in the absence of such arrangements, and
formal arrangements do not guarantee real collaboration. Evidence of collaboration may come
from face-to-face, electronic, and/or written communications.
Scoring:
5=
Critical analysis of current theory, research, and legal foundations for collaboration;
examples of all aspects of collaboration, with evidence that they are frequent, planned,
and ongoing aspects of practice; critical reflection on own understanding and practice
over time.
4=
Review of theoretical, research, and/or legal foundation for collaboration; evidence of
most aspects of collaboration, practiced frequently; critical reflection on understanding
and use of collaboration.
3=
Evidence of most aspects of collaboration used occasionally or some aspects used
regularly; reflection on use of collaboration; relevant theory, research, and/or law (at least
one area) discussed and connected with practice.
2=
Evidence of some aspects of collaboration practiced occasionally; minimal reflection;
little connection with foundations OR discussion of relevant theory, research, and/or law
with no evidence of practice.
1=
Evidence of communication with other teachers, school staff, community service
providers, and/or related service provider(s), but brief, intermittent, or incidental; no
reflection on practice and/or no connection with foundations.
0=
Competency not addressed.
7
Collaboration with Families
Collaboration with families in the education of children and youth is an essential component of
effective practice. Collaboration involves ongoing communication with families as equal
partners, as well as perspective seeking, problem solving, and sometimes conflict resolution.
Evidence of effective collaboration with families may be gathered during formal IEP/transition
planning, as well as day-to-day teaching practices and/or interactions with families.
Scoring:
5=
Thorough discussion of theory, research, and legal mandates relevant to collaboration
with families. There is strong evidence of firmly established mutual trust and respect in
interactions with families, as reflected in ongoing communication and problem solving
for long-term planning and day-to-day practice (e.g., student health, instruction, behavior
management), as well as skillful resolution of occasional conflicts. There is critical
reflection on the underlying theory, research, law, and associated practices, with
discussion of changes in own understanding and practice over time and how learning will
inform/change future practice.
4=
Discussion of theory, research, and/or legal mandates (at least two areas) relevant to
collaboration with families. There is evidence of mutual trust and respect in ongoing
communication and problem solving related to both long-term planning and day-to-day
practices. Reflection makes connections between foundations (theory/research/law) and
own practice, and how own learning has, does, and/or will inform and change practice.
3=
Discussion of theory, research, or legal mandates (at least one area) relevant to
collaboration with families. Evidence of mutual trust and respect in ongoing
communication for long-term planning and/or day-to-day practice. Reflection shows
connections between foundations and practice, and how own practice has changed.
2=
Some references to foundations, but only loosely connected to effective collaboration
with families. Some evidence of communication, but focused primarily on school
interests and priorities, without evidence of mutuality or perspective seeking. Reflection
focuses on foundations with little connection to own practice, OR focused on practice
without connection to foundations.
1=
Evidence suggests superficial interactions with families and/or lacks connections to
foundations for effective collaboration with families.
0=
Competency not addressed.
8
Least Restrictive Environment
A challenge for all teachers is to ensure that all children and youth with disabilities have
opportunities for education with students who are not disabled, and that special education,
including supplementary aids and services, is designed to support students in the least restrictive
environment, in keeping with state and federal law. Addressing the LRE requirement may
involve a range of strategies, such as designing a transition plan, assessing general education
environments, designing instructional and behavioral supports needed for student success in
integrated settings, and/or directly providing those supports in collaboration with other teachers,
school staff, related service providers and/or community service providers.
NOTE: Although demonstrating this competency does not necessarily require teaching/learning
in integrated settings, it does require, at the very least, planning and preparing for return to and
successful participation in the least restrictive environment.
Scoring:
5=
Critical analysis of current law, theory, and research related to Least Restrictive
Environment; multiple examples of strategies promoting special education services in
LRE, with evidence that they are used routinely; critical reflection on understanding and
practice; demonstration of substantive efforts to move an educational system to become
more inclusive.
4=
Review of law, theory, and/or research (at least two) related to LRE; multiple examples
of practice, used routinely; critical reflection on understanding of LRE, especially as
related to own practice – prior, current, and future.
3=
Evidence of on-going practice(s) used to support and/or promote special education
services in LRE; some reflection on practice; relevant theory, research, or law discussed
and related to own practice.
2=
Examples of some efforts to support and/or promote special education services in LRE,
used occasionally; minimal reflection. OR only discussion of theory, research, and/or law
with no evidence of practice.
1=
Description of one practice related to LRE, but no evidence of practice, no reflection,
and/or disconnected from foundations.
0=
Competency not addressed.
9
Formal Assessment and IEP Development
Special educators administer and interpret curriculum-based and standardized achievement
assessments, conduct diagnostic testing, and construct assessments to evaluate student progress
and inform instruction. Special educators also use data to identify and use appropriate testing
modifications and accommodations, and develop and provide appropriate services and supports
through the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process. A complete IEP must include
present levels of performance; annual goals (and short-term instructional objectives for some
students); evaluation criteria; description of appropriate services and supports provided in the
least restrictive environment (LRE); timelines for all services; and other guidelines for providing
related services, supplementary aids and services, assistive technology, and accommodations and
modifications. These components must be logically related to one another and derived from
assessment results, and written in language that all team members can understand.
Scoring:
5=
Substantive discussion of theory, research, and legal foundations for meaningful and nondiscriminatory assessment and development of IEPs, including inappropriate assessment
and IEP practices in schools. Demonstrated ability to administer and interpret a variety of
tests and construct and use curriculum-based assessments to conduct diagnostic work,
develop IEPs, measure progress, and determine appropriate modifications and
accommodations. Write an IEP that is complete, highly integrated (e.g., goals and
objectives follow from assessment), and easily understood. Include critical reflection on
experiences with, limitations of, and keys to effective assessment and meaningful IEPs.
4=
Discussion of theory, research, and/or legal foundations (at least two areas) for
meaningful and non-discriminatory assessment and development of IEPs, including
inappropriate assessment and IEP practices in schools. Demonstrated ability to administer
and interpret a variety of tests and to use curriculum-based assessments to develop
meaningful and integrated IEPs and measure progress. Write an IEP that is well
integrated, includes the major components of an IEP, and is easily understood. Include
critical reflection on experiences with assessment and IEP development.
3=
Discussion of theory, research, or legal foundations (at least one area) for appropriate
development of IEPs, and some critical reflection on own practices. Demonstrated ability
to use a variety of assessment data to develop present levels of educational performance,
goals/objectives, and modifications for an IEP, and to measure progress on an IEP.
2=
Lacks discussion of theory, research, and/or legal foundations and critical reflection.
Demonstrated ability to effectively use a variety of assessment data to develop most
components of an IEP and to measure progress on an IEP. Some evidence of assessment
and IEP development are provided, but the relationship between assessment and the IEP
is weak, or major components of the IEP are missing.
1=
Some aspects of assessment and IEP development are demonstrated, but no relationship
between assessment and the IEP, and major components of the IEP are missing.
0=
Competency not addressed.
10
Instruction and Curriculum-Based Assessment
Documentation of effective instruction and curriculum-based assessment will include a video (on
tape, CD, or internet) of approximately 20 minutes that demonstrates activities you have planned
for and implemented with a heterogeneous group of students. The video should include both
yourself and your students. Provide a lesson plan that is referenced to evidence-based practice,
shows the relationship of this lesson to the IEP for at least one student and to New York State
Standards and core curriculum, shows differentiated instruction for all students, and includes
formative assessment. Provide a guide to direct the viewer of the video. (NOTE: Starting and
ending points must be described clearly; digital counters alone are not reliable indicators.)
Scoring:
5=
Substantive discussion of theory, research, and legal foundations regarding evidencebased instructional approaches for mixed ability groups. Detailed lesson plan includes
clear, observable and measurable objectives referenced to NYS standards and IEP
objectives, research-based strategies for whole group instruction, detailed
accommodations, modifications and/or adaptations for specific student(s), and an explicit
plan for assessment of all students’ prior knowledge and learning. Ability to implement
plan demonstrated in 20-minute video with clear guidance for viewing, evidence of
assessment (pre and post), and critical reflection on teaching practices and outcomes.
4=
Discussion of theory, research, and legal foundations (at least two areas) regarding
evidence-based instructional approaches for mixed ability groups. Lesson plan includes
observable and measurable objectives referenced to NYS standards and IEP objectives,
research-based strategies for whole group instruction, accommodations, modifications
and/or adaptations for specific student(s), and a plan for assessment of student learning.
Ability to implement plan demonstrated in 20-minute video with guidance for viewing,
evidence of student learning, and critical reflection on teaching practices and outcomes.
3=
Some discussion of theory, research, and legal foundations (at least one area) regarding
instruction of mixed ability groups. Lesson plan includes some observable and
measurable objectives referenced to NYS standards and IEP(s), researched-based
strategies for whole group instruction, accommodations, modifications and/or adaptations
for a specific student(s), and a plan to assess student learning. Ability to teach lesson
demonstrated in a 20-minute video with guidance for viewing, discussion of student
learning (but no evidence), and some reflection on lesson effectiveness.
2=
Lesson plan for teaching student(s) with IEP(s), 20-minute video of lesson being taught
with guidance for viewing the video. Lesson plan includes IEP objectives and plan for
assessment, but there is little or no evidence that instructional strategies are grounded in
research and minimal discussion of student learning.
1=
Lesson plan and/or video of teaching not included and/or not well-developed. No
connection to theory, research, and legal foundations and/or no critical reflection.
0=
Competency not addressed.
11
Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports
Positive behavior intervention and supports (PBIS) is a system of proactive behavior
management that involves teachers, other professionals, students, and/or parents working
together to resolve problems with student behavior. Issues can be addressed at multiple levels:
school-wide, class-wide, through targeted small group interventions, and through intensive
individualized interventions. The first step in PBIS is to identify and clearly define the target
behavior. Next, a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) is conducted, which includes several
weeks of data collection from multiple sources, both direct and indirect, and in-depth analysis to
determine antecedents, consequences, and functions of the problem behavior. Then, a behavioral
intervention plan (BIP) is developed to teach more appropriate behavior and reduce the problem
behavior. Finally, the plan is implemented, with ongoing data collection and analysis, and the
BIP is modified as needed for effective resolution of the problem.
Scoring:
5=
Practices for dealing with behavior issues are connected with theoretical and research
literature and state/federal regulations, with critical analysis of literature and practice;
examples of PBIS applied to major and minor issues with individuals or groups in the
classroom or school; critical reflection on implementation and outcomes, as well as plans
for using PBIS in the future. FBA and BIP are well-documented with extensive data
collection, thorough analysis, systematic modification, and strong evidence that plans led
to behavior change. Reflection on all aspects of assessment, planning, implementation,
and analysis.
4=
Practices are connected with theoretical and research literature and law (at least two),
with critical analysis; examples of PBIS applied to at least one major behavior issue in
classroom or school settings. FBA and BIP include all elements, implementation includes
systematic modification. Reflection on effectiveness of the FBA and BIP.
3=
Practices are connected with theory, research, or law; examples of practices applied to
one major issue or numerous minor issues seen in the classroom or school; FBA and BIP
are adequate, but some elements may be weak or missing (e.g., data collected several
days but not several weeks, data from direct observation only, analysis and plan give
more weight to consequences than antecedents).
2=
Theory, research, or law mentioned but little connection to practice; FBA and BIP lack
critical analysis (e.g., emphasize student compliance more than resolving underlying
problems); OR little evidence of implementation.
1=
FBA and/or BIP missing; no discussion of theory, research, or law; OR no or evidence of
implementation or reflection on practice.
0=
Competency not addressed.
12
Special Education Technology
Special education technology starts with but goes beyond the hardware, software, and internet
resources that teachers use routinely. State and federal laws guarantee students with disabilities
the technology, ranging from universal design to individualized supports, as required to
participate in and benefit from education in LRE. Special education technology includes high,
low, and mid-tech devices and applications for sensorimotor readiness (e.g., positioning,
focusing); mobility; alternative/augmentative communication; computer software to support
instruction (e.g., graphic organizers, word prediction, text to speech, Braille); cell phone
applications; and numerous access devices (e.g., specialized keyboards, microswitches).
Scoring:
5=
Critical analysis of theory, research, and law related to technology for students with
disabilities. Evidence of several types of high, low, and mid-tech devices and
applications, used routinely. Critical reflection on own understanding and practice over
time.
4=
Review of theory, research, and or/law related to technology for students with
disabilities. Evidence of some types of high, low, and/or mid-tech devices and
applications, used routinely. Reflection on own understanding and practice.
3=
Evidence of one technology application used routinely to support education of a student
with disabilities, or multiple applications used occasionally. Reflection on practice;
relevant theory, research, or law (at least one area) discussed and connected with practice.
2=
Evidence of one technology application for a student with disabilities, used occasionally;
minimal reflection; little or no connection with foundations; OR discussion of relevant
theory, research, or/and law, but no application.
1=
Discussion of technology, but not related to a student with disabilities, applied to trivial
needs, and/or no evidence of application; no reflection and/or no connection to
foundations.
0=
Competency not addressed.
13