CEC Program Report

(1)

Section I Context

A. State and institutional standards

Delta State University provides training for special education teacher candidates through a Master of Education degree in mild/moderate disabilities. This program is offered in the Division of Teacher Education, which is a unit of the College of Education. Historically the focus of special education training at Delta State University was through the undergraduate program, with the

graduate program serving as advanced training. However, changes in teacher licensure and new interpretations of highly qualified status for special education teachers led to a decline in undergraduate enrollment, resulting in the phase out of the undergraduate program beginning Fall Semester of 2005. Simultaneously, enrollment in the graduate program began to increase dramatically as the state allowed special education licensure at the master’s level without corresponding undergraduate licensure. Ten years ago, most candidates in the special education master’s program had undergraduate licensure in special education, elementary education, or in a content area. Now most candidates enrolled in the master’s program have degrees in disciplines other than education, although several did minor in special education in their undergraduate programs.

Licensure issues for candidates in our program are complex. In Mississippi, teacher licensure is available on the A level (undergraduate degree), AA level (master’s degree), AAA level (educational specialist degree) and AAAA level (doctoral degree). It is expected that teachers receive an A license as their initial licensure. Those teachers pursuing AA licensure without an undergraduate degree in education must pursue alternate route licensure, either through an intensive A level training regimen (not available in special education at Delta State University), or enroll in an MAT program. The exception is in special education, where a candidate may, upon finishing a master’s degree in special education, apply for AA licensure without first receiving alternate route certification.

In our master’s degree program we have three distinct subsets of candidates. One set of candidates includes students who are already licensed on the A or AA level in special education, elementary education or a content area. Most of these candidates are presently employed as special education teachers, elementary education teachers, or content area teachers on the secondary level. A second set of candidates includes students who have alternative teaching licenses and are pursuing standard licensure through a combination of state training for alternative route teachers and candidacy for a master’s degree in special education. These candidates are employed as special education teachers. The first two sets of candidates are part-time students who take 3 - 6 hours a semester. Most of their practicum experiences are in the schools where they teach. The third set of candidates includes full time students who presently do not have licensure to teach. They enroll in 9 hours a semester and are placed in practicum experiences with highly qualified mentor teachers.

Changes in interpretation of highly qualified status for Mississippi special education teachers in the 2005-2006 school year left numerous veteran special education teachers struggling to become highly qualified. In addition, the state has begun to pressure school districts to move to full inclusion. School districts have instituted full inclusion programs with little training for teachers and

(2)

have felt disenfranchised by these changes. Many retired, quit, or transferred to general education teaching positions, which

exacerbated an already desperate special education teacher shortage. Increasingly, schools in the area are staffed with novice special education teachers, many of whom are on alternate licensure. The dearth of qualified, experienced special education teachers in the region complicates our efforts to provide quality field experiences. Many of the practices delineated by CEC in the ten standards are being inadequately implemented by inexperienced teachers and are poorly monitored by administrators.

This teacher shortage has led to increased enrollment in the special education master’s degree program, especially by those without teaching licenses. Three issues have emerged in our teacher education program as a result of these circumstances: First, class size has grown, creating challenges in: a) how we deliver instruction, b) how we deliver instruction in a culturally responsive manner, c) how we create quality field experiences, and d) how we provide adequate feedback. Second, with large numbers of candidates on alternate licensure using their place of employment for field experiences, we have less control over teaching conditions. Third, in many schools in the area there are few experienced special education teachers to serve as field supervisors or mentors. All three groups are affected by the lack of feedback from experienced peers in the school setting.

B. Field and clinical experiences

A large percentage of the candidates in our program are presently employed in school settings either as teachers or

paraprofessionals. Informally, these candidates are implementing strategies and practices in their own classrooms or instructional situations throughout their programs. Formally, all candidates have three major field experience requirements: a) a field experience in a setting with elementary aged children, b) a field experience with adolescents, and c) an intensive culminating internship or

practicum.

Since our program prepares candidates for teaching in K-12, we require initial field experience in both elementary and secondary settings. Two practicum courses, Programming for Adolescents with Mild/Moderate Exceptional Learning Needs (CSP 643) and Education of Individuals with Mild/Moderate Exceptional Learning Needs (CSP 686),require a combination of 30 hours of field experience. The candidates may divide their hours as they choose as long as they have a combination of 30 hours and at least 10 hours in each age range. Candidates may complete these hours in their own classroom or school setting as long as the age range of the children is appropriate, and the candidate can meet all requirements for the experience. Candidates who teach all day with one age range may meet their field experience requirement in approved after school programs for children with ELN or who are at risk for ELN. In addition to meeting the 30-hour requirement, each course requires specific activities in the setting including targeted observations, writing and implementation of lesson plans, and reflections on each lesson implemented.

(3)

necessary because a candidate cannot self-evaluate and design an improvement plan for field research if he or she is not presently teaching.

Candidates who have not completed a student teaching experience or the equivalent are required to complete a 200-hour internship. This internship parallels the undergraduate requirements of student teaching at Delta State University. If the candidate is already teaching on alternate licensure, he or she completes the 200 hours in his or her own classroom but must have a field

supervisor. Candidates who are not working in school settings are placed in the same manner as a student teacher. All candidates in internships are observed a minimum of three times by Delta State University special education faculty.

C. Admission and retention standards

Individuals may be admitted to the special education master’s degree program who hold an undergraduate degree in any discipline with a minimum overall GPA of 2.5 or a GPA of 2.75 in their last 64 hours of coursework. During the initial phase of the program, candidates must earn a B or higher in stipulated course work and submit passing scores from the Praxis I exam in reading, writing and mathematics. Full time candidates must meet these requirements by the end of their first 9 hours, and part time candidates must meet these requirements at the end of their first 12 hours. Candidates who meet these requirements are fully admitted to the graduate degree program. Candidates who earn a C or below during the first 9 or 12 hours are dismissed from the program.

Candidates complete a program of study that outlines all required coursework while maintaining a 3.0 grade average. If a candidate’s overall grade point average on graduate courses drops below a 3.0, he or she is placed on probation and is no longer considered a candidate for a degree. Probationary status can be removed by raising the overall grade point average to 3.0 or higher on all graduate work at the end of the semester following placement on probation. For candidates enrolled in summer school, both summer terms are used to determine if probationary status should be removed. Failure to be removed from probation in the manner described results in dismissal from the degree program.

Individuals who have been dismissed from a graduate degree program may be eligible to apply for re-admission, with approval from their respective graduate program and school, one full semester after their dismissal. One full semester refers to one regular term (fall or spring) or both summer terms. During the dismissal term, individuals who intend to return to their graduate degree program are encouraged to address deficiencies in their academic work with their advisor and academic program coordinator. In addition, any candidate who earns three grades of C or one grade of D or F is dismissed from the degree program. An individual is not eligible to seek readmission to the university after a second dismissal from a graduate degree program.

(4)

D. Relationship to unit’s conceptual framework

The Delta P³ model is predicated on five principles: a) education is a life long endeavor, b) education is interactive and reflective, c) education is culturally contextualized, d) education is dynamic and e) education is enhanced by technology.

The Master of Education degree program in special education exemplifies these principles. We are constantly reminded of the renewable nature of education by the diverse background of our candidates. Our candidates exemplify that education is a life long endeavor because they represent those with traditional training in special education who are updating their knowledge base in the discipline, as well as those with training in elementary and secondary education who are supplementing their training to better serve children with ELN. Additionally, a large number of our candidates are training to be teachers for the first time.

Candidates in the special education Master of Education degree program are given frequent opportunities to reflect on their classroom experiences in the degree program before, during and after their experiences in P-12 classrooms. Each course has numerous reflection activities. In addition, the special education program folio completed in the internship/practicum experience requires

reflection on a synthesis of the ten standards delineated by CEC.

Preparing to teach special education requires each candidate to examine his or her world view and philosophy of education within a cultural context. With increased emphasis on inclusive teaching in special education, all educators are forced to

re-conceptualize the culture of school and the culture of the classroom. This re-conceptualization leads each candidate to explore the full diversity of our region including not only issues of disability, but race, gender, ethnicity, and socio-cultural factors.

As candidates reflect on their own experiences and examine the cultural context of teaching within their communities, we who develop the program reflect on their experiences and feedback and respond by making program modifications. The formal program assessment system is used to suggest programmatic changes. Each semester, faculty members formally meet to consider program adjustments to improve program outcomes. Additionally, individual instructors adjust instruction, feedback and assessment systems in courses based on formal student course evaluations and student responses to informal class activities.

Increasingly, technology serves to supplement and enhance the graduate experience. The Internet opens a world of information to professionals in a geographically isolated region of Mississippi. Word processors and graphics packages enable candidates to produce high quality presentations and projects. Additionally, candidates learn how to use technology to enhance their own classroom teaching. They develop standards-based lesson plans, learn about emerging assistive technologies and develop professional electronic portfolios using TaskStream. Technology also facilitates program and course assessment and information management in the master’s degree programs.

E. Program and unit assessments

(5)

For special education graduate program entry, our candidates must have passing scores on Praxis I, a 2.5 GPA in an

undergraduate program or a 2.75 GPA in the last 64 hours of undergraduate work, and a grade of B or higher on the first 9 hours of graduate work. Prior to clinical practice, candidates complete a self-evaluation covering 15 categories of dispositions that impact student learning (CSP 643). In addition, 30 hours of field experiences in elementary and secondary settings includes both observation and lesson plan delivery (CSP 643 and CSP 686). A diversity assessment is completed in EPY 601 and a technology assessment is completed in ELR 605.

Upon completion of clinical practice, candidates are assessed on their ability to demonstrate instructional planning and delivery that quantitatively impacts student learning. These assessments for candidates who have not had student teaching as part of their undergraduate degree program occur during the 200-hour internship that includes a minimum of three clinical observations using STAI indicators. Candidates who have already completed student teaching develop a TaskStream folio in order to demonstrate content mastery of their clinical practice, as well as mastery of all 10 CEC standards. Also included in the TaskStream folio is a philosophy of education statement and reflections for each standard.

(6)

ATTACHMENT A Candidate Information

Directions: Provide three years of data on candidates enrolled in the program and completing the program, beginning with the

most recent academic year for which numbers have been tabulated. Report the data separately for the levels/tracks (e.g., baccalaureate, post-baccalaureate, alternate routes, master’s, doctorate) being addressed in this report. Data must also be reported separately for programs offered at multiple sites. Update academic years (column 1) as appropriate for your data span. Create additional tables as necessary.

Program:

Master of Education in Special Education

Academic

Year # of Candidates Enrolled in the Program

# of Program Completers1

2003-2004 23 2

2004-05 40 11

2005-06 53 12

1_{NCATE uses the Title II definition for}_{program completers}_{. Program completers are persons who have met all the requirements of a state-approved teacher}

(7)

Faculty Member Name Highest Degree, Field, & University Assignment: Indicate the role of the

faculty member Faculty Rank Tenure Track (Yes/ No)

Scholarship, Leadership in Professional Associations, and Service:List up to 3 major contributions in the past 3

years

Teaching or other professional experience

in P-12 schools

Vicki Jean Hartley,

Ed.D. Ed.D. in special education University of Southern Mississippi Coordinator of special education, teaching faculty, field supervisor Associate

professor YES Hartley, V.J. (2006, August). Co-Teaching and _{Inclusion, Living and Working Together.} Workshop for Canton Public Schools, Canton, MS.

Lambert, E., & Hartley, V. J. (2006, March.) Multi-Stage lesson planning: An ongoing challenge in a rural setting. Presentation at the meeting of the American Council of Rural Special Education, Lexington, KY.

Hartley, V.J. (Fall, 2004). Reflective practice: A way of being, not of doing. Delta Education Journal

Supervised field experiences, student teachers and interns, in P-12 settings, 2001-2005

Inservice training in Canton, Cleveland, Charleston, Greenwood, Greenville.

Maud Kuykendall Ed.D Special Education University of Northern Colorado Teaching faculty, field supervisor Assistant

Professor Yes Kuykendall, M. (2005). Cleveland, MS: Delta Education Journal. Thinking about all children. Kuykendall, Maud. Roots and branches: Growing into inclusion. Presented at The American Council on Rural Special Education March 2006.

Kuykendall, M. Preservice teacher perceptions of inclusion in their host schools. Presented at Delta State University Woodall Spring Conference for Helping Professions March 2006.

Weld County School District Six, Greeley, CO 1997-2004 Teacher, Special Education – General Education 1999-2004 Teacher, Special Education 1997-1999

Elaine A. Lambert, M.Ed. M.Ed. Special Education, Memphis State University (University of Memphis) ABD in Professional Faculty/Field Supervisor

Instructor No Student Engagement Champion Representative

College of Education 2005-2006

Lambert, E., & Hartley, V. J. (2006, March). Multi-Stage lesson planning: An ongoing challenge in a rural setting. Presentation at the

meeting of the American Council of Rural Special Education, Lexington, KY.

Special Education

(8)

Studies/Higher Education, Delta State University

Teacher Education Council Representative College of Education

(9)

A proposed program of studies for the Master of Education degree in Special Education: Mild/Moderate Disabilities K-12

Name: SS#:

Address:

Phone: E-mail:

CORE COURSES REQUIRED

Course

Number Title

Date To Be Taken

Date

Taken Grade

Credit Hours

EPY 601 Psychology of Learning every

semester 3

ELR 605 Methods of Educational Research and Statistics every

semester 3

CUR 608 Historical Foundations of Ed. Thought and Curriculum Methods every

semester 3

Must have a 3.0 on core courses Total 9 MAJOR FIELD COURSES

Course

Date

Taken Grade

CSP 545 Special Education Assessment Spring 3

CSP 616 *Behavioral Management Fall/Spring 3

CSP 640 *Education of Young Children with Exceptional Learning Needs Summer 3

CSP 643 *Programming for Adolescents with M/M Exceptional Learning Needs Fall 3

CSP 546 *Advanced Survey of Exceptional Children Summer 3

CSP 547 Internship In Special Ed. (BS degree in another field) or

CSP 647 Practicum In Special Education (BSE in Special Education)

Last Spring

(10)

CSP 682 Programming for Ind. With M/M Exceptional Learning Needs Summer 3

CSP 686 *Education of Individuals. with M/M Exceptional Learning Needs Fall 3

CRD 624 Methods of Teaching Reading Spring/Sum. 3

CSP 550 Programming for Individuals with Severe/Multiple Disabilities Summer

*Courses covered on comprehensive exam Total 30 TRANSFER COURSES TO BE CONSIDERED

Course

Date

Taken Grade

Total hours in program 39

Approved:

Student signature and date

Advisor signature

(11)

SECTION III—RELATIONSHIP OF ASSESSMENT TO STANDARDS

For each CEC standard on the chart below, identify the assessment(s) in Section II that address the standard. One assessment may apply to multiple CEC standards.

CEC STANDARD APPLICABLE ASSESSMENTS FROM SECTION II

FIELD EXPERIENCES AND CLINICAL PRACTICE STANDARD

Special education candidates progress through a series of developmentally sequenced field experiences for the full range of ages, types and levels of abilities, and collaborative opportunities that are

appropriate to the license or roles for which they are preparing. These field and clinical experiences are supervised by qualified professionals.

Information should be provided in Section I (Context) to address this standard.

CONTENT STANDARDS

1. Foundations. Special educators understand the field as an evolving and changing discipline based on philosophies, evidence-based principles and theories, relevant laws and policies, diverse and historical points of view, and human issues that have historically influenced and continue to influence

the field of special education and the education and treatment of individuals with exceptional needs both in school and society. Special educators understand how these influence professional practice,

including assessment, instructional planning, implementation, and program evaluation. Special educators

understand how issues of human diversity can impact families, cultures, and schools, and how these

complex human issues can interact with issues in the delivery of special education services. They understand the relationships of organizations ofspecial education to the organizations and functions

of schools, school systems, and other agencies. Special educators use this knowledge as a ground upon which to construct their own personal understandings and philosophies of special education.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the program is preparing candidates.

X

#1

X

#2

□

#3

□

#4

□

#5

X

#6

□

#7

□

#8

2. Development and Characteristics of Learners. Special educators know and demonstrate respect for their students first as unique human beings. Special educators understand the similarities and differences in human development and the characteristics between and among individuals with

and without exceptional learning needs (ELN)1/_{. Moreover, special educators understand how}

exceptional conditions can interact with the domains of human development and they use this knowledge to respond to the varying abilities and behaviors of individual’s with ELN. Special

educators understand how the experiences of individuals with ELN can impact families, as well as the

individual’s ability to learn, interact socially, and live as fulfilled contributing members of the

(12)

community.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the preparation program is preparing candidates.

3. Individual Learning Differences. Special educators understand the effects that an exceptional condition2/ can have on an individual’s learning in school and throughout life. Special educators

understand that the beliefs, traditions, and values across and within cultures can affect relationships among and between students, their families, and the school community. Moreover, special educators are

active and resourceful in seeking to understand how primary language, culture, and familial backgrounds interact with the individual’s exceptional condition to impact the individual’s academic

and social abilities, attitudes, values, interests, and career options. The understanding of these learning differences and their possible interactions provides the foundation upon which special educators individualize instruction to provide meaningful and challenging learning for individuals with ELN.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the program is preparing candidates.

X

#1

X

#2

□

#3

□

#4

□

#5

X

#6

□

#7

□

#8

4. Instructional Strategies. Special educators posses a repertoire of evidence-based instructional strategies to individualize instruction for individuals with ELN. Special educators select, adapt, and

use these instructional strategies to promote positive learning results in general and special curricula3/ and to appropriately modify learning environments for individuals with ELN. They

enhance the learning of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills of individuals

with ELN, and increase their awareness, management, control, reliance, and self-esteem. Moreover, special educators emphasize the development, maintenance, and generalization of

knowledge and skills across environments, settings, and the lifespan.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the program is preparing candidates.

X

#1

X

#2

X

#3

X

#4

□

#5

X

#6

□

#7

□

#8

5. Learning Environments and Social Interactions. Special educators actively create learning environments for individuals with ELN that foster cultural understanding, safety and emotional

well-being, positive social interactions, and active engagement of individuals with ELN. In addition, special

educators foster environments in which diversity is valued and individuals are taught to live

(13)

harmoniously and productively in a culturally diverse world. Special educators shape environments to encourage the independence, motivation, direction, personal empowerment, and

self-advocacy of individuals with ELN. Special educators help their general education colleagues integrate individuals with ELN in regular environments and engage them in meaningful learning

activities and interactions. Special educators use direct motivational and instructional interventions

with individuals with ELN to teach them to respond effectively to current expectations. When necessary, special educators can safely intervene with individuals with ELN in crisis. Special educators

coordinate all these efforts and provide guidance and direction to paraeducators and others, such as

classroom volunteers and tutors.

6. Language. Special educators understand typical and atypical language development and the ways

in which exceptional conditions can interact with an individual’s experience with and use of language. Special educators use individualized strategies to enhance language development and teach communication skills to individuals with ELN. Special educators are familiar with augmentative, alternative, and assistive technologies to support and enhance communication of individuals with

exceptional needs. Special educators match their communication methods to an individual’s language proficiency and cultural and linguistic differences. Special educators provide effective language models

and they use communication strategies and resources to facilitate understanding of subject matter for individuals with ELN whose primary language is not English.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of language for and with individuals with ELN through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the preparation program is preparing candidates.

X

#1

X

#2

X

#3

X

#4

□

#5

X

#6

□

#7

□

#8

7. Instructional Planning. Individualized decision-making and instruction is at the center of special education practice. Special educators develop long-range individualized instructional plans

anchored in both general and special curricula. In addition, special educators systematically translate these individualized plans into carefully selected shorter-range goals and objectives taking into

consideration an individual’s abilities and needs, the learning environment, and a myriad of cultural and linguistic factors. Individualized instructional plans emphasize explicit modeling and efficient guided practice to assure acquisition and fluency through maintenance and generalization. Understanding of

these factors as well as the implications of an individual’s exceptional condition, guides the special

(14)

educator’s selection, adaptation, and creation of materials, and the use of powerful instructional variables. Instructional plans are modified based on ongoing analysis of the individual’s learning progress. Moreover, special educators facilitate this instructional planning in a collaborative context

including the individuals with exceptionalities, families, professional colleagues, and personnel from other agencies as appropriate. Special educators also develop a variety of individualized transition plans, such as transitions from preschool to elementary school and from secondary settings to a variety

of postsecondary work and learning contexts. Special educators are comfortable using appropriate technologies to support instructional planning and individualized instruction.

8. Assessment. Assessment is integral to the decision-making and teaching of special educators and special educators use multiple types of assessment information for a variety of educational decisions.

Special educators use the results of assessments to help identify exceptional learning needs and to develop and implement individualized instructional programs, as well as to adjust instruction in response to ongoing learning progress. Special educators understand the legal policies and ethical principles of measurement and assessment related to referral, eligibility, program planning, instruction, and

placement for individuals with ELN, including those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Special educators understand measurement theory and practices for addressing issues of

validity, reliability, norms, bias, and interpretation of assessment results. In addition, special educators understand the appropriate use and limitations of various types of assessments. Special educators

collaborate with families and other colleagues to assure non-biased, meaningful assessments and decision-making. Special educators conduct formal and informal assessments of behavior, learning,

achievement, and environments to design learning experiences that support the growth and development of individuals with ELN. Special educators use assessment information to identify supports and adaptations required for individuals with ELN to access the general curriculum and to participate in

school, system, and statewide assessment programs. Special educators regularly monitor the progress

of individuals with ELN in general and special curricula. Special educators use appropriate technologies to support their assessments.

(15)

9. Professional and Ethical Practice. Special educators are guided by the profession’s ethical and professional practice standards. Special educators practice in multiple roles and complex situations across wide age and developmental ranges. Their practice requires ongoing attention to legal matters

along with serious professional and ethical considerations. Special educators engage in professional activities and participate in learning communities that benefit individuals with ELN, their families,

colleagues, and their own professional growth. Special educators view themselves as lifelong learners

and regularly reflect on and adjust their practice. Special educators are aware of how their own and others attitudes, behaviors, and ways of communicating can influence their practice. Special educators understand that culture and language can interact with exceptionalities, and are sensitive to the many aspects of diversity of individuals with ELN and their families. Special educators actively plan and

engage in activities that foster their professional growth and keep them current with evidence-based best practices. Special educators know their own limits of practice and practice within them.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the preparation program is preparing candidates.

X

#1

X

#2

□

#3

□

#4

□

#5

X

#6

□

#7

□

#8

10. Collaboration. Special educators routinely and effectively collaborate with families, other educators, related service providers, and personnel from community agencies in culturally responsive ways. This collaboration assures that the needs of individuals with ELN are addressed

throughout schooling. Moreover, special educators embrace their special role as advocate for individuals with ELN. Special educators promote and advocate the learning and well being of individuals with ELN across a wide range of settings and a range of different learning experiences. Special educators are viewed as specialists by a myriad of people who actively seek their collaboration to effectively include and teach individuals with ELN. Special educators are a resource to their colleagues in understanding

the laws and policies relevant to Individuals with ELN. Special educators use collaboration to facilitate the successful transitions of individuals with ELN across settings and services.

Beginning special educators demonstrate their mastery of this standard through the mastery of the CEC Common Core Knowledge and Skills, as well as through the appropriate CEC Specialty Area(s) Knowledge and Skills for which the preparation program is preparing candidates.

(16)

Assessment 1: Content Knowledge- State Licensure Test

1. Description of assessment: Mississippi requires teachers seeking licensure in special education of the mildly/moderately disabled to take the Praxis Specialty test entitled

Education of Exceptional Children. A passing score for Mississippi licensure is 136. Our

candidates are required to pass the Praxis specialty test to qualify to take the comprehensive examination.

2. How the assessment aligns with the standards cited: The Education of Exceptional Children Praxis aligns with all 10 CEC standards. The test has 3 sections: a)

Understanding Exceptionalities, b) Legal and Societal Issues and c) Delivery of Services. These sections sample a wide range of topics in special education. Content in the

Understanding Exceptionalities section includes: human development, characteristics of disabilities, basic concepts of exceptionality including classifications and definitions, and influence of exceptionality in the life span (standards 1-3). Content in the Legal and Societal Issues section includes legislation and litigation effecting special education, collaboration with school and community, and historical movements in special education (standards 1 and 10.) Content in the Delivery of Services section includes conceptual models, placement and programming, curriculum and instruction, assessment, structuring learning environments, professional roles and ethical issues (standards 4-10). In sum, Assessment 1 evaluates all ten standards.

3. Analysis of data: Four candidates completed the program in Spring Semester, 2006. One candidate was completing a non-teaching program of study which did not require

candidates to take licensure tests. This program was discontinued at the beginning of Fall Semester, 2004. This was the last candidate to finish in this program. The other three candidates passed the Praxis specialty test with scores ranging from 149 to 153. The passing score in Mississippi is 136. The scores received by Delta State do not break scores into subtests. Effective Fall Semester 2006, candidates will be expected to submit sub-scores as well as a composite score.

4. How this is evidence of meeting standards: This measure is required by CEC as one measure of content mastery. The state considers this test sufficient to award supplemental licensure with no additional course work. It is a broad measure and can be seen as only one measure of the many facets of the 10 standards.

(17)

Attachment 1

2006 Graduates in Special Education Praxis Specialty Area Scores

Education of Exceptional Students

CANDIDATE SCORE

Passing Score 136

(18)

Assessment 2: Content Knowledge- Comprehensive Examination

1. Description of assessment: Candidates take an essay-type comprehensive examination in the last semester of their program. This exam is a five hour examination comprised of five broad questions. Each question represents content and skills in each of the following five classes: CSP 546, CSP 643, CSP 640, CSP 686 and CSP 616. These courses

represent a) an overview of special education (CSP 546), b) curriculum, instruction and assessment for early childhood (CSP 640), elementary school (CSP 686) and secondary school (CSP 643) and c) instructional and classroom management (CSP 616).

2. How the assessment aligns with the standards cited: Although the questions on the comprehensive examination are keyed to five specific classes, each question requires the candidate to synthesize information from the entire degree program. Therefore, questions tap into the full knowledge and skill base of each candidate.

3. Analysis of data: One candidate did not pass the comprehensive examination. This candidate was completing a non-teaching major which has since been phased out. She was given the option of making an oral defense of her written examination, and was given a passing score based on her oral defense. She was the last candidate for which this option was available.

The average score on question 1 was 59% overall, 68 % excluding the candidate who failed the exam. Minimum competency is set at 70%. Half the candidates failed this question. The two candidates who failed the question misinterpreted the question in the same way, responding with information on effective teaching without reference to behavior management, which was the substance of the question.

Average scores on questions 2 through 5 ranged from 74% to 80% (79% to 84%

excluding the candidate who failed the exam). The lowest average score (74%/79%) was on the question related to CSP 546/ Advanced Survey of Exceptional Children. The highest average score (80%/84%) was on the question related to CSP 686/ Education of Individuals with Mild/Moderate Exceptional Learning Needs (the elementary methods course).The overall average score for this set of candidates was 74% (79% excluding the candidate who failed the exam).

Scores were also analyzed on the basis of writing elements scored by the rubric (Chart 2b). Scores were remarkably consistent across the writing elements. Averages ranged from 70% on content depth to 76% on mechanics. Scores indicate minimum adequacy in writing skills.

4. How this is evidence of meeting standards: Two of the four candidates scored above 70% on every question. One candidate scored above 70% on 4 out of 5 questions with an average of 71%. This indicates adequate performance on synthesizing the breadth and depth of knowledge and skills presented in the degree program.

(19)

Attachment 2A Comprehensive Examination Spring 2006

Comprehensive Exam - Special Education - Spring 2006 - AM Session

Read the set of questions carefully. Select one question from each course and answer in depth. You will have 3 hours for this session.

CSP 616

A. Good teaching and classroom management are considered by many to be inextricable. How do teacher actions facilitate behavior management or interfere with student behavior? How can techniques such as pre-correction, surface management, classroom rules and procedures contribute to student learning of social and academic behaviors? Discuss how theorists such as Curwin and Mendler, Glasser, C.M. Charles, Fred Jones, and Kounin connect effective teaching with effective discipline. Suggest a list of 5-10 tips for connecting effective teaching and effective discipline and elaborate on each.

B. Discuss the use of Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA), Teacher Support Teams and Behavioral Intervention Plans (BIP). What does the law (IDEIA ’04) require? What procedures would be considered best practice?

CSP 640

A. Discuss the three (3) fields upon which early childhood special education (ECSE) is built. Discuss the contributions of at least two (2) influential people in each of the three (3) fields.

B. Jim is a four-year-old child identified as developmentally delayed. He attends an inclusive pre-kindergarten at his neighborhood elementary school. He receives special education services to address cognitive and language delays. He also receives

Occupational Therapy to address delays in adaptive behavior. Choose three (3) major trends in early childhood special education and describe how each of these trends could apply to Jim.

CSP 643

A. You have been asked to evaluate the transition systems in your school district and to make suggestions for improvement. What procedures would you expect to see in place for a quality system of transition? What best practices would you recommend in rural school districts?

(20)

Comprehensive Exam - Special Education - Spring 2006 – PM

Read the set of questions carefully. Select one question from each course and answer in depth. You will have 2 hours for this session.

CSP 546

A. Friendly aliens have landed! They want to know how to set up special education services on their planet. You have one hour to explain the basics. You must discuss legislation, how students qualify for services, the IEP process and personnel, disability categories, and how collaboration makes it all work.

B. When you started your master’s degree in special education, you had reasons for entering the field. As you finish your program, you take with you a wealth of knowledge about special education. First, state your reasons for entering the field. Next, take each of the following categories and define and describe the facts and concepts associated with each one. 1) Litigation and legislation, 2) IEP process and personnel, 3) the 13 disability categories, and 4) Best practices in instructional planning and instructional strategies. Include leaders and theorists in the field.

CSP 686

A. You are preparing to teach your first day as an elementary special education teacher. You will be team teaching in a 4th grade classroom. Describe how you will use the 5 traits of effective teaching. Name the trait and define it as well as give examples of how you will demonstrate competence by using each trait.

(21)

Attachment 2b Rubric and Scoring Sheets for

Comprehensive Exams

MECHANICS (SPELLING, GRAMMAR, PUNCTUATION AND USAGE) Weight-3

1- Spelling, grammar, punctuation or usage errors are frequent and interfere measurably with content, style and clarity

2- Major errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation and usage with no evidence of effort to edit, errors interfere some, but not greatly with content, style and clarity

3- Some errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation and usage, obvious efforts at editing present, errors interfere only slightly with content, style and clarity

4- Few, if any spelling, grammar, punctuation or usage errors, none interfere with content, style or clarity

CONTENT: BREADTH Weight-5

1- Addressed only one or two aspects of question, did not address one or more significant aspect directly stated in question

2- Attempted to address most aspects of question, but gaps in information exist

3- Addressed all or most aspects of the question to some extent, did not extend topic to areas indirectly stated, yet relevant

4- Addressed all or most aspects of the question, extended topics to areas indirectly stated but clearly relevant

CONTENT: DEPTH Weight-5

1- Insufficient detail, did not define terms, give examples, elaborate on concepts

2- Some effort at detail, but inconsistent in defining terms, giving examples or elaborating on concepts 3- Adequate detail, terms clearly defined, relevant examples given, concepts thoroughly explored 4- Adequate detail, terms clearly defined, relevant examples given, concepts thoroughly explored,

terminology specific to the discipline used consistently and well, specific theories and theorists named

CONTENT: TIMELINESS, ACCURACY, AND APPROPRIATENESS Weight-5

1- Most of information outdated, irrelevant, inaccurate 2- Some of information outdated, irrelevant, inaccurate

3- Outdated, irrelevant, inaccurate information in some few instances, but other information essentially correct

4- Outdated, irrelevant, inaccurate information rare

ORGANIZATION (SENTENCE LEVEL, PARAGRAPH LEVEL, ESSAY LEVEL) Weight-4 1- No clear outline within paragraphs or within essay, no introduction or conclusion

2- Some effort at organization within paragraphs or within essay, introduction and/or conclusion missing or inadequate

3- Organization within paragraphs and within essay, adequate introduction and conclusion

4- Clear outline within paragraphs and within essay, strong introduction and conclusion, obvious main idea and supporting detail throughout

CLARITY Weight- 3

1- Imprecise word choices, mangled sentence structure, frequent misplaced modifiers, redundancies, colloquialisms, and/or slang

2- Stale vocabulary, simplistic sentences or some mangled sentences, some misplaced modifiers, redundancies, colloquialisms, and/or slang, overall impression of informal or immature writing 3- Sentences clear, variety of sentence structure, few, if any, misplaced modifiers, redundancies,

colloquialisms, and/or slang, overall impression of adequate writing

(22)

COMPREHENSIVE EXAM SCORING GRID - SPECIAL EDUCATION

Student Number _________________________ Date

Question# 1 2 3 4 5 total

Mechanics

Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, Usage

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight 3

Total mechanics /60

Content

Breadth 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight-5

Total Breadth _/100

Content

Depth 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight-5

Total Depth /100

Content

Timeliness, Accuracy, Appropriateness

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight-5

Total timeliness /100

Organization Sentence Level, Paragraph Level, Essay Level

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight-4

Total organization /80

Clarity 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Weight-3 Total clarity

/60

/100 /100 /100 /100 /100 /500

Overall Score: ______________________/500 (350/500 required for pass = 70%)

Comments:____________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________ _________________

Signature of Reader

(23)

COMPREHENSIVE EXAM SCORING GRID - SPECIAL EDUCATION

Student Number _________________________ Date ________________________

Question# 1 2 3 4 5

Mechanics

Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, Usage

Weight-3

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Content Breadth

Weight-5

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Content Depth

Weight-5

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Content

Timeliness, Accuracy, Appropriateness

Weight-5

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Organization

Sentence Level, Paragraph Level, Essay Level

Weight-4

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Clarity

Weight-3

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Overall Score: ______________________/500 (350/500 required for pass = 70%)

Comments:__________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

(24)

Attachment 2C Comprehensive Exam Data Chart 2.1

Comprehensive examination results by question Each question worth 300 total points

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Average per candidate CK* 86

28%

200 67%

210 70%

184 61%

199 66%

59%

SH 247

82% 289 96% 259 86% 210 70% 256 85%

84%

LS 248 83%

233 78%

266 89%

238 79%

247 83%

81%

YM 121

40% 214 71% 214 71% 266 89% 256 85%

71%

Average ** per question

(59%)

68%

(78%)

82%

(79%)

82%

(74%)

79%

(80%)

84%

(74%)

79%

* CK was enrolled in a program for non-teaching degree which has been discontinued. In this program, if a candidate did not pass written comprehensive exams, an oral comprehensive exam was offered. This candidate passed the oral exam. This is the last semester that this option was made available.

(25)

Chart 2.2

Comprehensive examination results by writing element

Mechanics Possible

points: 180

Content breadth Possible points: 300

Content depth Possible points: 300

Content accuracy Possible points: 300

Organization Possible points: 240

Clarity Possible points: 180

CK* 99

55%

180 60%

175 58%

190 63%

136 57%

99 55%

SH 156

87% 255 85% 245 82% 250 83% 196 82% 159 88%

LS 165

92%

240 80%

215 72%

205 68%

172 72%

165 92%

YM 126

70% 220 73% 205 68% 220 73% 180 75% 120 67%

Average per element

76% 75% 70% 72% 71% 75%

(26)

Assessment 3: Assessment of Candidate’s Ability to Plan-STAI

Planning Section

1. Description of assessment: Undergraduate programs at Delta State University use the STAI (Student Teacher Assessment Instrument) to evaluate student teaching. Because our candidates are enrolled in an initial preparation program, even though it is a graduate program, we have chosen to use the STAI in our assessment of planning and

implementation of instruction. The first section of the STAI rates the candidates on planning and preparation for teaching. In CSP 686 and 643 field experiences, we use a modified form of these indicators which break down the skills into subcomponents (Attachment 3A).

2. How the assessment aligns with the standards cited: Instructional planning in the STAI format incorporates a direct instruction model. This model requires the candidate to systematically plan instruction based on the characteristics of the learners. The candidate must write an objective tied to the state curriculum frameworks, formulate teaching procedures that represent evidence based practice, select and/or adapt materials and media, and plan for assessment of student learning. Additionally, the plan requires candidates to consider the classroom environment and behavioral expectations.

Therefore, assessment of instructional planning evaluates standards 4 through 8 and 10.

Primarily, this assessment addresses standard 7, instructional planning. However, other standards are also evaluated by this assessment. The candidate must have a repertoire of effective instructional strategies from which to select (standard 4). He or she must understand how the classroom environment and social interactions factor into planning for group and individual activities (standard 5). Language delays and disabilities must be considered when preparing presentation and response modes (standard 6). An integral part of lesson planning is tracking progress through systematic assessment (standard 8). Finally, because many of our candidates are teaching in inclusive settings, they must learn to plan collaboratively (standard 10).

3. Analysis of data: To successfully complete the internship experience, each candidate must submit a lesson plan for evaluation. This plan is rated using a scale of 1-4 on ten indicators. The candidate must score a 3 or 4 on all indicators. Therefore, all candidates in the internship scored a 3 or 4 on all ten indicators. Our concern is with the percentage meeting expectations (3) as opposed to the percentage exceeding expectations (4). Three out of ten candidates in the internship exceeded expectations on 70% of the planning indicators. The range of performance was 0-90% of indicators per candidate exceeding expectations. Of the ten indicators, the only one on which 70% or more of the

candidates exceeded expectations was indicator #7, “plans lessons that integrate knowledge from several subject areas” (70%).

(27)

4. How this is evidence of meeting standards: Candidates have demonstrated the ability to plan for instruction on a fundamental level. They can write a basic lesson plan that incorporates student needs, direct instruction methods, assessment of student progress and a variety of methods and materials.

(28)

Attachment 3A STAI Lesson Planning Instruction and Forms

STAI Lesson Plan Elements

Objective: State in measurable terms what new knowledge or skill the

student will demonstrate at the end of the lesson. In follow up you will

assess the student exactly as stated in the objective.

Objectives include:

• Conditions

• Behavior

• Content

• Criteria

All other elements of the lesson lead to the mastery of the skill or knowledge stated in the objective

Intro/Set: (designed to SET the stage for the lesson. Make it

interesting, make it entertaining, make it stimulating)

Includes these elements (not necessarily in this order)

• Purpose of lesson (why are we learning this, how can I use this)

• Statement of learning (objective restated in “kid” words)

• Connection to previous knowledge (what else is this like)

• Motivation (something to make them interested in learning this)

• Behavioral expectations (how am I supposed to act during this lesson)

Demonstration/explanation (teach them the material by

demonstrating, explaining, illustrating or having them explore the

topic):

I DO IT

Adjust your presentation according to the knowledge form:

• Facts: use rapid fire repetition with multimodal presentation

• Concepts: show them examples and nonexamples of the concept using multimodal presentation, lead them to identifying the essential elements of the concept

• Procedures/strategies: teach them the steps for performing the task, make sure they are shown a list or diagram of the steps and that they not only know how to do the task but can tell you what the steps are

Guided practice (students perform the task with your cognitive

modeling, corrective and motivational feedback): WE DO IT

Ms. Lambert says: 2-3 activities are better than 1

Adjust practice according to the knowledge form:

• Facts: use activities centered on rapid fire drill and practice

• Concepts: use activities designed to get them to put things into categories while explaining essential elements of each item placed into a category

(29)

Continue until each student has demonstrated mastery of the skill with support

Independent practice (Students perform the task on their own with

your motivational feedback): YOU DO IT

Ms. Lambert says: 2-3 activities are better than 1

Adjust practice according to the knowledge form:

• Facts: use activities centered on individual or paired rapid fire drill and practice

• Concepts: use individual or paired activities designed to get them to put things into categories while explaining essential elements of each item placed into a category

• Procedures/strategies: use individual or paired activities that have student practice steps in a sequence while verbalizing the steps

Culmination/closure (wind up the lesson)

Go over the independent practice. Review activities from all the practice activities. Practice for assessment activity. Preview next related activity.

Follow up (assessment, enrichment, homework)

• Do an assessment activity and record results on progress sheet

• Assign follow up homework if appropriate

• Have content related enrichment activities available for students who finish assessment activity early or if assessment is done one student at a time

What goes in each column

Objective Column

Each lesson plan has a single objective. But the lesson may have related enrichment or remedial objectives. These may be targeted to an individual student or a group of students. If you write remedial or enrichment objectives, there must be procedures imbedded in the lesson plan to allow for demonstration, sufficient practice and assessment of the remedial and enrichment objectives as well as the original objective.

Teaching procedures column

Intro/set through follow up goes in this column. These are your directions for teaching. A

stranger should be able to read down this column and picture in his/her mind every step of your lesson. In fact, a stranger who knows a little bit about your subject should be able to pick it up and teach off it.

Materials column

(30)

chart) or a photo of the item (large 3 dimensional item). For these items, you list them in the materials column as attachment 1, attachment 2, with a description. For example: Attachment 2- Poster of the Planets. Each material is listed parallel to where it is used in the lesson. If a single material is used in more than one place, it should be listed in each place it is used. Attachments are included at the end of the lesson.

Evaluation column

This column is for formative assessment. How do you know your plan is working? There are natural check points.

• At end of demonstration you ask some questions to see if they understand. So opposite

that section in the evaluation column you will write something like “question for understanding”

• At end of guided practice, you want to know whether they are ready to move to

independent practice. So opposite that section in the evaluation column you can write ”question for understanding”, or “teacher observation” or even “checklist” depending on the level of formality you are using

• At end of independent practice, you want to know if they are ready for individual

assessment of the skill. In the section opposite in the evaluation column you can again use ”question for understanding”, or “teacher observation” or even “checklist” depending on the level of formality you are using

• In the follow up section you are assessing the skill for the record. In the teaching

(31)

Student Teacher’s Name: Page:

STAI LESSON PLAN

Subject/Topic/Unit: Date: Grade Level: I. Main Ideas/Conceptual Understanding/Goals:

II. Specific Objectives * Enrichment Objectives ** Remedial Objectives

Ind. #

III. Procedure: A.

Introduction/Motivation, B. Study/Learning Activities, C. Culmination,

D. Follow-up (Include directional statements for evaluation and any enrichment or individual activities)

IV.

Materials/Resources

(32)

Attachment 3B

STUDENT TEACHER ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT (STAI)

Planning and Preparation DELTA STATE UNIVERSITY

SPECIAL EDUCATION

DSU SUPERVISOR FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

Student Teacher ____________________________________ SSN ______________________

Evaluator ____________________________________________ Semester/Year ___________

Use Reference Guide to assess performance -- 3 is minimum:

Appraisal 1 - Ineffective, Unacceptable Practice 3 - Acceptable, Safe to Practice Scale: 2 - Marginally Acceptable Practice 4 - Outstanding, Effective Practice

PLANNING AND PREPARATION FIRST SECOND (PORTFOLIO) ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT

1. Clearly-stated learner objectives _______ _______

2. Teaching procedures _______ _______

3. Content, materials, and media _______ _______

4. Assessment procedures and materials _______ _______

5. Uses information about students _______ _______

6. Uses knowledge of students needs, _______ _______ interests, and experiences

7. Plans lessons that integrate knowledge _______ _______ from several subject areas

8. Incorporates multiculturalism and _______ _______ diversity in lessons

9. Research-supported instruction _______ _______

(33)

Expanded STAI indicators: used in CSP 686 and 643 field experiences

Written Lesson Plan Rubric for CSP ______ Student name: Evaluator: Date:

1 4- met all

requirements

3- met most

requirements

2- met some

requirements

1- met few

requirements

1. Specifies or selects objectives for lessons.

a. Objective in behavioral terms

b. Objective passes stranger test

c. Objective connects to previous learning

d. Objective aligns with assessment

2 1 2 3 4 2. Specifies or selects procedures for lessons.

a. Procedures include teacher centered and learner centered activities

b. Procedures promote student involvement

c. Procedures are directly linked to objective

3 1 2 3 4

3. Specifies content materials and media for lessons.

a. Materials and media are high quality

b. Materials are appropriate to objective and procedures

c. A variety of materials are used

d. Materials are appropriate for students

4 1 2 3 4 4. Specifies or selects materials and procedures for assessing learning progress.

a. Assessment is directly linked to objective

b. Assessment provides sufficient information to determine level of mastery

c. Assessment includes formative and summative measures

d. Assessment of interests and/or attitudes is included if appropriate

5 1 2 3 4 5. Uses knowledge of students’ needs interests and experiences.

a. Procedures/materials show consideration of student interests

b. Procedures/materials show consideration of student experiences

6 1 2 3 4 6. Plan lessons that integrate knowledge from several subject areas.

a. Plan is clearly focused on content from objective

b. Information from other subjects or other aspects of this content is included where appropriate

c. Teacher takes advantage of ‘teachable moments’

7 1 2 3 4 7. Incorporates multiculturalism and diversity in lessons.

a. Lesson plan reflects high expectations

b. Lesson plan reflects sensitivity to differences in culture

c. Lesson plan is culturally relevant

d. Lesson plan uses cooperative learning strategies as well as competitive strategies

8 1 2 3 4 8. Uses information about students to plan and organize instruction to accommodate differences in

developmental and individual needs.

a. Procedures/materials show consideration of level of learning

b. Procedures/materials show consideration of rate of learning

c. Procedures/materials show consideration of learning style

9 1 2 3 4 9. Utilizes research supported instructional strategies and practices to meet the needs of individual learners

a. Procedures are best practice for skill being taught

- Factual knowledge is taught through repetition

- Conceptual knowledge is taught through a range of examples and non-examples

- Strategic /procedural knowledge is taught through modeling the steps

b. Procedures are sequenced to provide movement from no skill/low skill level to mastery of skill

10 1 2 3 4 10. Includes the use of direct instruction strategies to teach new skills or concepts.

a. Introduction/set includes all elements

b. Demonstration/ explanation includes sufficient exemplars to lead to guided practice

c. Guided practice includes sufficient practice and specific feedback

d. Independent practice includes sufficient practice and is separate from assessment procedures

e. Assessment procedures are specified

(34)

Attachment 3C Planning and Preparation Data

Attachment 3C: Planning and Preparation: STAI 1-10: Lesson Plans N = 10

CANDIDATE JB EG DF CJ TK DN LR VS MT JW MEAN

SCORE % MEETS EXPECTATIONS % EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

Qt. #

1. 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.7 40 60

2. 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3.5 50 50

3. 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3.5 50 50

4. 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3.4 60 40

5. 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3.5 50 50

6. 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3.4 60 40

7. 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3.7 30 70

8. 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.2 80 20

9. 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3.4 60 40

10. 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3.3 70 30

% Exceeds

expectations 70 40 80 60 0 90 20 60 30 10