KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION INED 7730: Assessment for Diverse Learners (*Last day to withdraw w/o academic penalty: )

Transcription

1 KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION INED 7730: for Diverse Learners (*Last day to withdraw w/o academic penalty: ) I. COURSE: INED 7730 Number/section: Course Title: for Diverse Learners II. INSTRUCTORS: Name: Office: Office Phone: Office Hours: By appt. III. CLASS MEETING: Campus: IV. TEXT & MATERIALS: Required Text: Overton, T. (2012). Assessing Learners with Special Needs: An Applied Approach (7th ed.). Pearson: NJ. Supplemental reference list provided. V. CATALOG DESCRIPTION: This course is designed to provide knowledge and skills regarding assessment procedures, process (including pre-referral and Response to Intervention), and protocols utilized in making eligibility and instructional decisions regarding individualized education programs and placements. In addition, candidates develop an understanding of assessment terminology, accommodations, and fidelity of implementation, as well as culturally appropriate assessments, and gain expertise in communicating assessment results to key stakeholders including student and families. Field experience is required.

2 Pre-requisites: Admission to KSU graduate program VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE: This course will establish foundational knowledge of assessment and evaluation of learners, with an emphasis on using data for educational decision making process within PK-12 schooling contexts. The purpose of the course is to prepare prospective special education teachers to become competent in administration procedures and practices used in educational assessments, the interrelation of critical factors that impact an educational assessment, and communication of assessment findings to parents and other professionals. The competencies in this course are derived from the requirements of the GA Professional Standards Commission (PSC), Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), National Board of Professional Teaching (NBPTS), Interstate New Teachers and Support Consortium (INTASC) and the NCATE/, and PTEU. In addition, and as part of their professional responsibilities, teachers of students with disabilities need to know the legislative and litigative implications of the demands of their practice in the identification of students with mild disabilities. Conceptual Framework Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning Our vision as a nationally recognized KSU Education Preparation Provider (EPP) unit is to remain at the forefront of educator preparation. Informed by responsive engagement in collaborative partnerships, we advance educational excellence through innovative teaching in an ever-changing global and digital learning environment. Our mission is to prepare educators to improve student learning within a collaborative teaching and learning community through innovative teaching, purposeful research, and engaged service. The essence of our vision and mission is captured in the theme Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership which was adopted in 2002 to express concisely the fundamental approach to educator preparation at KSU. The KSU Education Preparation Provider (EPP) unit at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers, teacher leaders and school leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and to enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the EPP fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the EPP conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the EPP recognizes, values, and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, local communities, public and private schools and school districts, parents and other professional partners, the EPP meets the ultimate goal of bringing all of Georgia s students to high levels of learning. Use of Technology. Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission. Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and ensure access to the general education curriculum, as well as an administrative management tool. Candidates in this course will explore and use instructional media to assist teaching. They will master productivity tools, INED DRAFT 2

3 such as multimedia facilities, l Internet, and assistive technology, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials and use diagnostic software. EPP Diversity Statement The KSU Education Preparation Provider (EPP) unit believes all learners are entitled to equitable educational opportunities. To that end, programs within the PTEU consist of curricula, field experiences, and clinical practice that promote candidates development of knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions related to diversity identified in the unit s conceptual framework, including the local community, Georgia, the nation, and the world. Curricula and applied experiences are based on welldeveloped knowledge foundations for, and conceptualizations of, diversity and inclusion so that candidates can apply them effectively in schools. Candidates learn to contextualize teaching and draw effectively on representations from the students own experiences and cultures. They learn to collaborate and engage with families in ways that value the resources, understandings, and knowledge that students bring from their home lives, communities and cultures as assets to enrich learning opportunities. Candidates maintain high expectations for all students (including English learners, students with exceptionalities and other historically marginalized and underrepresented students), and support student success through research-based culturally, linguistically, and socially relevant pedagogies and curricula. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2008). Professional standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation institutions. Washington, DC: NCATE. Accessibility: Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of A number of services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required. Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above. Course Specific Field Experience: While completing your graduate program at Kennesaw State University, you will complete several applied experiences which facilitate bridging of theory to practice. In addition, because special education is a K-12 certification, you must complete a field experience at each of the following grade level bands: P-2; 3-5; 6-8; and You also must document experiences with diverse learners including English Learners. If you are currently employed as a teacher and work with students with disabilities, you can complete your field experience within you own setting. If you are not employed, or do not work with students with disabilities, you will need to complete a 50 hour field experience during which time you will complete the applied key assessment. Placements will be coordinated by the Center for Field Experience and Placements and require a KSU Background Check and Proof of Liability Insurance. Candidates will observe access to the curriculum, complete a reflection, and assist their cooperating teacher with the implementation of differentiated instruction. VII. COURSE OBJECTIVES: INED DRAFT 3

4 1. Identify and document starting points for instruction (e.g., screening and diagnostic assessments). 2. Develop and implement a system for collecting assessment data and centrally organizing it (technology). 3. Demonstrate an understanding of terminology, definitions, and issues in assessment practices (e.g., reliability, validity, fidelity). 4. Demonstrate an understanding of assessment practices and their implications for intervention (RTI) models for early identification of students with learning needs. 5. Communicate performance and progress for multiple audiences including students and families. 6. Identify various strategies for test-taking and test accommodations, adaptations and modifications, taking into consideration system-wide and classroom assessments. 7. Summarize and interpret assessment results to make informed and data-based decisions in eligibility, program implementation, and placement for students with special needs. 8. Use formative assessment, including progress monitoring, for decision making and improving instruction. 9. Collaborate with families and colleagues to assure nonbiased, meaningful assessments and decision making. 10. Consider possible cultural and linguistic limitations of assessment procedures to prevent biases in determining eligibility and instructional needs. 11. Interpret formalized assessments and reports relative to eligibility. 12. Advocate for equitable assessment practice. Program Objectives: 1. Reflective and collabortive practitioner 2. Evidence-based decision maker 3. responsive practitioner 4. Producer and consumer of research 5. Ethical practitioner 6. Advocate INED DRAFT 4

5 The following grid aligns course objectives and assessments with those of the KSU PTEU, GA PSC, NCATE/CEAP, InTASC,NBPTS,CEC and Ga Ethics. Course Objectives 1. Identify and document starting points for instruction (e.g., screening and diagnostic assessments). Program Objectives EPP Proficiencies CEC CEC InTASC NBPTS GaPSC / Ethics 2.9, , 2, 6 V 1.h.3, 2.h j Ethics: 1, 4, 7, , 1.2, 1.4, 1.5 s IRIS Module 2. Develop and implement a system for collecting assessment data and centrally organizing it (technology). 2.8, , 2, 6 6g,6i,6n V 1.h.6, 1.h.8, 1.h.14, 1.h.15 Ethics: 1,7,11 1.4, 1.2, Demonstrate an understanding of terminology, definitions, and issues in assessment practices (e.g., reliability, validity, fidelity). 4. Demonstrate an understanding of assessment practices and their implications for intervention (RTI) models for early identification of students with learning needs. Producer and Consumer of Research Producer and Consumer of Research Producer and Consumer of Research 1.1, 1.2, , 1.2, 2.7, 2.9, k , 2, 6 6o II V 1.h.l, 2.h.1 Ethics: 1, 7, 10, 11 1.g.18, 1.h.2, 2.h.2, 1.i.8 Ethics: 1,7,10, , 1.2 Exam Exam IRIS Module 5. Communicate performance and progress for multiple audiences 3.1, 3.3, , 7 6, 10 10l IV, VI 1.e.16; 1.h.10; 1.h Role Play

6 including students and families. Ethics: 1, 10, Identify various strategies for test-taking and test accommodations, adaptations and modifications, taking into consideration system-wide and classroom assessments. Reflective and Collaborative 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, , 2, 6 6c,6g,6l X 1.h.5; 1.h.9; 2.h.6 Ethics: 1, 10, , 1.2, 1.4 IRIS Module Exam 7. Summarize and interpret assessment results to make informed and data-based decisions in eligibility, program implementation, and placement for students with special needs. Producer and Consumer of Research 1.1, c,6l I, XII 1.h.10; 1.h.13 Ethics: 1, 10, , 1.2, 1.4 IRIS Module Role Play Exam 8. Use formative assessment, including progress monitoring, for decision making and improving instruction. Advocate Producer and Consumer of Research a,6b,6j,6k,6r, 6t V, XII 1.h.7; 1.h.8; 1.h.11; 1.h.13 Ethics: 1, 10, , 1.2, 1.4 IRIS Module INED DRAFT 6

7 9. Collaborate with families and colleagues to assure nonbiased, meaningful assessments and decision making. Reflective and Collaborative Reflective and Collaborative 3.1, 3.3, , 6, 7 6, 9, 10 10a,10b,10q IV 1.e.16; 2.h.3; 1.h.12; 1.j.2; 2.j.3; 1.j.4; 1.j.6; 1.j.13 Ethics: 10, Role Play 10. Consider possible cultural and linguistic limitations of assessment procedures to prevent biases in determining eligibility and instructional needs. 11. Interpret formalized assessments and reports relative to eligibility. Ethical Ethical 1.1, 1.4, 2.1, , 6 1, 2, 6, 9 6k,6u 1.1, 1.4, a,6c,6o,6t III V, VI 1.h.10 1.h.4; 1.h.7; 1.h.11; 1.i.10 Ethics: 10,11 Ethics: 10, , 1.2, , 1.4 Article Review Class Discussion IRIS Module 12. Advocate for equitable assessment practice. Ethical Ethical 1.1, 2.7, 3.1, 3.3, , 6 6, 10 10m,10o,10p, 10q,10t V, XII 1.h.2; 1.h.4; 1.h.7; 2.h.2 1.i.7; 2.i.4 Ethics: 10, Critical Reflection Advocate INED DRAFT 7

8 VIII. Course Requirements/Assignments: s: (SPED) This course contains a. s are aligned with the Georgia Professional Standards, the Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) Professional Competencies, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (), the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) standards, and the National Board Professional Teaching Standards. The s are strategically located throughout the program and serve as critical transition points. They provide an opportunity for candidates to demonstrate progression toward competency in the standards listed above. Demonstration of competency constitutes of a minimum performance level of 3 on each of the criterion in the Rubric. If the candidate does not achieve competency on the first attempt, he or she will be provided an additional opportunity to resubmit. At the discretion of each instructor, the grade on subsequent attempts might not be used in the computation of the final grade for the course. Competency on the must be achieved by the date designated in order to be able to progress in the program. Failure to do so may delay graduation. Not achieving competency in a by the date specified in the syllabus is not a valid reason for receiving a grade of incomplete in the course. REQUIRED: : Progress Monitoring Project The primary purpose of this is to teach and assess knowledge and skills to conduct diagnostic and formative assessments systematically. The progress monitoring (i.e., formative assessment) also includes the candidate s decision making process. The case study must be submitted via Chalk & Wire for assessment. A rubric for this assignment will be provided separately and is also available on Chalk & Wire. Instructions on the are provide in a separate document. : Course GPA IRIS Modules: Classroom (Part 1): An Introduction to Monitoring Academic Achievement in the Classroom: This module discusses how progress monitoring can affect the academic outcomes of students, and it demonstrates how to implement curriculum-based measurement with a classroom of students. Classroom (Part 2): Evaluating Reading Progress: This module explores in detail the assessment procedures integral to RTI. It also outlines how to use progress monitoring data to determine if a student is meeting the established performance criteria or if more intensive intervention is needed. RTI (Part 2): : This module explores in detail the assessment procedures integral to RTI. It also outlines how to use progress monitoring data to determine if a student is meeting the established performance criteria or if more intensive intervention is needed Critical Reflection on Learning NEED TO ADD THIS INFORMATION Additional s may consist of: Exams Quizzes Simulations

9 Case Studies Role Play Critical Reflections Class Discussions IX. Evaluation and Grading: A = % B = 80 89% C = 70 79% D = 60 69% F = 0 59% X. ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the University's policy on academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials, misrepresentation/falsification of University records or academic work,malicious removal, retention, or destruction of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes either an "informal" resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension requirement. Academic Honesty Statement The KSU Graduate Catalog states KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Any work that students present in fulfillment of program or course requirements should reflect their own efforts, achieved without giving or receiving any unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these expectations will be subject to disciplinary action. XI. ATTENDANCE POLICY: The expectations for attending class are in accordance with the Graduate Catalogue. All students are expected to attend classes in accordance with the scheduled time of the course. Should you be absent, you are responsible for making up the work missed. In-class activities may not be made up. XII. COURSE OUTLINE: Tentative Topics Suggested Readings INED DRAFT 9

10 WEEK 1: Foundations of : o IDEA Reauthorization Legal, ethical, and referral issues WEEK 2: o Cultural Bias and Disproportionality Overton, Chapter 1-3 Fletcher, T.V. & Navarrete, L.A. (2011). Learning Disabilities or Difference: A Critical Look at Issues Associated with the Misidentification and Placement of Hispanic Students in Special Education Programs. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 30 (1), WEEK 3: Planning for, Family Involvement, and WEEK 4: Collaborative Data-based Making Decker, S. L., Englund, J., & Albritton, K. (2012) Integrating multi-tiered measurement outcomes for special education eligibility with sequential decision-making methodology. Psychology in the Schools, 49 (4), Hojnoski, R. L., Gischlar, K. L., & Missall, K. N. (2009). Improving child outcomes with data-based decision making: Collecting data. Young Exceptional Children, 12(3), Lingo, A. S., Barton-Arwood, S. M., & Jolivette, K. (2011). Teachers working together: Improving learning outcomes in the inclusive classroom--practical strategies and examples. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 43(3), INED DRAFT 10

11 WEEK 5: Technical Aspects of o Reliability and Validity o Standardized, Norm-referenced, Criterionreferenced WEEK 6: o Scoring, Interpreting Tests and Writing Reports WEEK 7: Informal o Observation/Interviewing o Conferencing/Performance-based assessment Overton, Chapters 3-5 Overton, Chapters 6 & 7 Dorn, S. (2010). The political dilemmas of formative assessment. Exceptional Children, 76, WEEK 8: o o o Data Collection Procedures Performance Response to Intervention WEEK 9: Areas of (Academic, Behavioral, and High Stakes Testing) o of Achievement o Cognitive Development, Adaptive Behavior and Social Behavior WEEK 10: WEEK 11: o in the Content Areas: o Reading i.e. Curriculum-based assessment, checklists, questionnaires etc. o of Written Language o in Oral Language o in Math Other Aspects of Overton, Chapters 8 & 9 Edgemon, E.A., Jablonski, B.R. & Lloyd, J.W. (2006) Large scale assessments: A teacher s guide to making decisions about accommodations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), Yovanoff, P., & Tindal, G. (2007). Scaling early reading alternative assessments with statewide measures. Exceptional Children, 73(2), Overton, Chapters Towles-Reeves, E., Kleinert, H., & INED DRAFT 11

12 o WEEK 12: IEP Program Evaluation, Assessing Preschool Children Muhomba, M. (2009). Alternate assessment: Have we learned anything new? Exceptional Children, 75(2), o Transition Note: Readings may be revised to ensure recency of content. INED DRAFT 12