Skip to contentSkip to navigation

Get the latest information about Spring 2022 Updates/COVID-19. Before coming to campus, take the COVID-19 Daily Screening.

Standard 2: Aspect A

Standard 2a: Program completers engage in professional practice in educational settings and show that they have the skills and abilities to do so in a variety of additional settings and community/cultural contexts. For example, candidates must have broad and general knowledge of the impact of culture and language on learning, yet they cannot, within the context of any given program, experience working with the entire diversity of student identities, or in all types of school environments. 

Candidate preparation includes first-hand professional experience accompanied by reflection that prepares candidates to engage effectively in different contexts they may encounter throughout their careers.


Case for Standard 2a
The program selected three measures to examine its effectiveness in preparing students to engage with local/cultural communities: SPED 219 Letter Grades, EdQ Survey Data, and Post-Disposition Survey Data 

Data Sources & Analysis

Data Source 1

SPED 219: Effective Communication and Collaborative Partnerships Final Course Grades

Description of Data Source:
Students in our program take a course that focuses on communication and community: SPED 219: Effective Communication and Collaborative Partnerships. The course “examines the educational, psychological, and political issues that arise when developing collaborative relationships with families, interdisciplinary team members, general educators, agency professionals, and students themselves. The focus is on the development of materials, strategies, and skills to work with the range of individuals on the educational teams of students with disabilities effectively and positively.” 

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Program Faculty

Rationale for Using Data Source:
The entire course supports the understanding of and engagement with local school and cultural communities and developing relationships with a broad range of groups to better support students with disabilities in the communities in which they live.

Specific Elements of Data Source: 
Final course grades

Definition of Success for Each Element: 
Candidates are required to earn an A or a B in order to meet grade point average requirements for the program. 

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 1: Count of SPED 219 Final Grade Distributions by Semester from Fall 2018-Spring 2021
  Fall 2018
n= 36
Spring 2019
n= 25
Fall 2019
n= 26
Spring 2020
n= 30
Fall 2020
n= 27
Spring 2021
n= 73
# of A grades 27 17 20 25 26 72
# of B grades 5 6 4 4 0 0
# of C grades 3 1 1 0 0 0
# of D grades 0 1 0 0 0 0
# of F grades 0 0 1 0 0 0
# of I grades 0 0 0 0 0 0
# of CR grades 0 0 0 0 1 0
# of NC grades 0 0 0 0 0 0
# of W/WU grades 1 0 0 1 0 1
Note. *CR = Credit (an option for candidates during the pandemic); **NC = No Credit; 
***W or WU = Withdrawal

 

Table 2: SPED 219 Final Grade Distributions by percentage for academic years Fall 2018-Spring 2021
  2018-2019
n= 61
2019-2020
n= 56
2020-2021
n= 100
# of A grades 72.13% 80.30% 98%
# of B grades 18.03% 14.28% 0%
# of C grades 6.55% 1.78% 0%
# of D grades 2% 0% 0%
# of F grades 0% 1.78% 0%
# of I grades 0% 0% 0%
# of CR grades 0% 0% 1%
# of NC grades 0% 0% 0%
# of W/WU grades 2% 1.78% 1%

Link to Full Dataset: SPED 219 final grades

Interpretation of Data: 
The vast majority of candidates enrolled within the Special Education program met or exceeded the SPED 219 course requirements across all three years. This indicates that candidates are prepared to engage with, or are already engaging with local school and cultural communities, and communicating and fostering relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities and contexts.

Data Source 2

CSU Education Quality Center Program Completer Survey 

Description of Data Source:
Each year, the CSU Educator Quality Center administers a survey to program completers to learn their perceptions of how well the program prepared them in a number of areas aligned with the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE). Program completers from all CSU campuses are invited to respond to each item on a 1-5 scale, where 1 indicates they believed that they were “not at all” prepared and 5 indicates they believe they were “very well” prepared.” Fresno State has a high rate of completion due to the efforts of our credential analyst who requires completion as part of the credential application process. 

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Program Completers

Rationale for using Data Source: 
CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Survey captures program completers’ anonymous perspectives of how well the program prepared them at the conclusion of their teaching credential coursework and field experiences, providing valuable insights into their perceptions of the program.

Specific Elements of Data Source:
The three items we felt were most aligned with this aspect include:

How well did your program prepare you: 

  • To provide a continuum of support for consultation, collaboration, co-teaching to mentoring with multi or interdisciplinary team members
  • To work with colleagues to improve instruction
  • To work with families to better understand students and to support their learning.

Definition of Success for Each Element: Our definition of success:

  • 0% reporting in the “Not at all Prepared” category
  • 10% or less in the “Poorly Prepared” category
  • Overall positive ratings 90% or higher

Displays of Analyzed Data:
Table 3, CSU Completer Survey, Element 1, 2018-21

Element 1: To provide a continuum of support for consultation, collaboration, co-teaching to mentoring with multi or interdisciplinary team members
Year 2018-2019
N=61
2019-2020
N=52
2020-2021
N=48
Not at all 0% 0% 0%
Poorly Prepared 1.6% 3.8% 4.2%
Adequately Prepared 21.3% 26.9% 12.5%
Well Prepared 41% 38.5% 43.8%
Very Well Prepared 36.1% 30.8% 39.6%
Overall Negative 2% 4% 4%
Overall Positive 98% 96% 96%

Table 4, CSU Completer Survey, Element 2, 2018-21

Element 2: To work with colleagues to improve instruction
Year 2018-2019
N=61
2019-2020
N=50
2020-2021
N=48
Not at all 0% 0% 2.1%
Poorly Prepared 4.9% 2% 4.2%
Adequately Prepared 21.3% 24% 8.3%
Well Prepared 45.9% 42% 43.8%
Very Well Prepared 27.9% 32% 41.7%
Overall Negative 5% 2% 6%
Overall Positive 95% 98% 94%

Table 5, CSU Completer Survey, Element 3, 2018-21

Element 3: To select, adapt, and develop materials, resources and technologies to make subject matter accessible to all students
Year 2018-2019
N=61
2019-2020
N=52
2020-2021
N=48
Not at all 0% 0% 2.1%
Poorly Prepared 4.9% 1.9% 4.2%
Adequately Prepared 31.1% 30.8% 16.7%
Well Prepared 39.3% 40.4% 45.8%
Very Well Prepared 24.6% 26.9% 31.3%
Overall Negative 5% 2% 6%
Overall Positive 95% 98% 94%

Link to Full Dataset:The link to the full dataset is unavailable. However, if reviewers would like to view the CSU Educator Quality Center Data Dashboards, we are happy to set up a time to provide them access by sharing screens in a Zoom session.

Interpretation of Data: 
As we’ve seen with other responses to the Completer Survey, the majority of our students fall within the 90% overall positive perception of their readiness in relation to the identified elements. So many of our students feel prepared to work with colleagues and families, indicating that our completers have a commitment to both school and local communities. However, we have concerns about the percentage of students who feel “not at all prepared” or “poorly prepared.” The last year in particular saw increasing numbers of students who rated themselves as underprepared. This may have something to do with movement towards online student teaching necessitated by the pandemic. It may have been a particular challenge to work with broader teams at school sites remotely and to reach out to families when our teacher candidates were not physically at school sites. The next data source gives additional insight into candidates’ perceptions of their readiness. 

Data Source 3

Post-Dispositions Survey

Description of Data Source:
In this third measure, candidates evaluate their own progress on six broad professional dispositions in each of their three clinical experiences through the Pre- and Post- Dispositions Survey. The professional dispositions include Reflection, Critical Thinking, Professional Ethics, Valuing Diversity, Collaboration, and Life-long Learning. Each of the six dispositions is subdivided into descriptors with which candidates self-assess their progress. Candidates evaluate each disposition on a four-point Likert Scale, ranging from No/limited evidence/application (value = 1) to Exceptional evidence/application (value= 4). The Post-Dispositions Survey data are collected in candidates’ culminating clinical experience. 

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Candidate

Rationale for Using Data Source:
This data provides our program with the candidates’ perception of their progress on some of the behaviors required for successful professional practice. These self-assessments are key to understanding the perspectives of our candidates on their development of these specific dispositions. 

Note: The data collected from our data system, Tk20, was available only for Fall 2019, Spring 2019, Spring 2020, and Spring 2021. The reason that data are available for only those semesters is unknown, however, it may have to do with a change in the Tk20 binder format and forms. 

Specific Elements of Data Source: 

Survey items: 

(a) Demonstrates the ability to work creatively and collaboratively with colleagues, parents, and the community; 
(b) Values families as full partners in the educational process; 
(c) Collaborates with general education teachers in the modification of instruction, curriculum and assessment of students with special needs; and 
(d) Communicates on a regular basis the progress of students with special needs to parents and general education teachers.

Definition of Success for Each Element: 
As a program, our goal is that the overall average score for completers will be 3.0 (Satisfactory evidence) or above. 

Displays of Analyzed Data:
Table 6, Post-Dispositions Survey, Collaboration Item, 2019-21

Post-Disposition: Demonstrates the ability to work creatively and collaboratively with colleagues, parents, and the community.
Term Spring 2019
N=43
Spring 2020
N=26
Fall 2020
N=20
No response 26 4 0
No/limited evidence/ application (1) 0 0 0
Some evidence/ application - (2) 1 0 2
Satisfactory evidence/ application - (3) 7 7 6
Exceptional evidence/ application - (4) 9 15 12
% of candidates who responded with scores of 3 or 4 94% 100% 90%

Table 7, Post-Dispositions Survey, Values Family Item, 2019-21

Post-Disposition: Values families as full partners in the educational process
Term Spring 2019
N=43
Spring 2020
N=26
Fall 2020
N=20
No response 26 4 1
No/limited evidence/ application (1) 0 0 0
Some evidence/ application - (2) 1 0 1
Satisfactory evidence/ application - (3) 5 4 3
Exceptional evidence/ application - (4) 11 18 15
% of candidates who responded with scores of 3 or 4 94% 100% 95%

Table 8, Post-Dispositions Survey, Collaboration with General Education Teachers Item, 2019-21

Post-Disposition: Collaborates with general education teachers in the modification of instruction, curriculum and assessment of students with special needs
Term Spring 2019
N=43
Spring 2020
N=26
Fall 2020
N=20
No response 26 4 1
No/limited evidence/ application (1) 1 0 0
Some evidence/ application - (2) 4 1 1
Satisfactory evidence/ application - (3) 6 13 8
Exceptional evidence/ application - (4) 6 8 11
% of candidates who responded with scores of 3 or 4 71% 95% 95%

Link to Full Dataset:  Standard 2a Post-Disposition Survey

Interpretation of Data:
Responses to this survey are stored in a system called Tk20. Due to reformatting, data was not available for other semesters. In addition, the response rate from completers did not provide much substantive data as completers seemed to choose the dispositions that they wished to report rather than reporting on all dispositions. Because of this, the percentages reflect only those numbers for which there were responses and are not representative of the candidates as a whole. 

Nevertheless, based on existing data, the pass rates scores for completers indicate that they feel confident in their ability to work creatively and collaboratively with colleagues, parents, and the community and with valuing families as full partners in the educational process. Where completers have the greatest struggle is in communicating the progress of students with special needs to parents and general education teachers on a regular basis. It is unclear if this is due to the completers’ dispositions or if this is based on the limited opportunities to engage in collaboration with general education teachers that they may have experienced during student teaching. This more granular data gives us insight specifically into what we need to address within our program in the area of communication and collaboration. 

Next Steps Narrative:
In order to address what we found, we will ensure course redesigns address identified strengths and weaknesses within the program. For completers in final student teaching, the opportunities to meet dispositional expectations need to be ensured as it is not equitable to be scored on a teacher-related performance tool when one has had no opportunity to practice. We will ensure course redesigns align with new State teacher performance standards and that assignments/assessment data address those standards. We will also use data and analyses more consistently in program meetings in order to ensure the program is meeting the learning needs of candidates in understanding and engaging local school and cultural communities, and communicating and fostering relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities. 

Aspect B →