PERMANENT STATUS PROGRAM REVIEW (PSPR)

Ed.S. in School Psychology

Prepared by Marika Ginsburg-Block Ph.D., Program Coordinator

Fall 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. PERMANENT STATUS REQUEST FORM…………………………………3

II. FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION………………………………………..6

III. ORIGINAL PROGRAM PROPOSAL……………………………………….7

IV. GRADUATE PROGRAM POLICY DOCUMENT.………………………..11

V. ASSESSMENT OF LIBRARY RESOURCES……………………………..23

VI. SELF STUDY REPORT

1. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM………………27

A. INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY…………………………….27

B. UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC PRIORITIES……………………...29

C. GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS………………….30

D. CURRICULAR REQUIREMENTS……………………………..30

E. RESULTS OF PROGRAM QUALITY ASSESSMENTS………34

F. STUDENT ADVISEMENT STRATEGIES…………………….37

G. PROGRAM ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS………..…40

H. ADMISSION CRITERIA AND DEGREE REQUIREMENT…..40

I. RECRUITING PROCEDURES…………………………………42

2. STUDENT INFORMATION

A. APPLICATION AND ENROLLMENT HISTORY…………….43

B. PLACEMENT OF GRADUATES………………………………44

C. FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS…………………….44

3. FACTORS FOR ATTRACTING STUDENTS………………………….45

4. PROGRAM UNIQUENESS…………………………………………….45

5. INTERDISCIPLINARY RELATIONSHIPS……………………………46

6. PROGRAM FACILITIES……………………………………………….46

7. BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS……………………………………...46

8. OTHER INFORMATION

A. Assessments Used to Measure Program Quality………………...47

B. Assessment 1: Praxis II Scores…………………………………..50

C. Assessment 2: Course Grades……………………………………55

D. Assessment 3: Practicum Ratings………………………………..59

E. Assessment 4: Internship ratings………………………………...72

F. Assessment 5: Internship Portfolio………………………………87

G. Assessment 6: Comprehensive Case Study……………………...97

H. Assessment 7: Alumni Survey………………………………….100

I. NASP/NCATE Feedback on Program Assessment Tools……...111

J. Program response to NASP Standard 1………………………...112

VII. APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR PROVISIONAL APPROVAL…………………………………………………………....122

APPENDIX B: TRANSCRIPT OF OPEN HEARINGS……………………....126

APPENDIX C: FACULTY SENATE CONCERNS……………………….….127

APPENDIX D: LETTERS OF SUPPORT……………………………………..128

APPENDIX E: PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT……………………………...130

APPENDIX F: NEW LETTERS OF APPROVAL…………………………….131

PERMANENT STATUS REQUEST FORM

UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE FORMS

Academic Program Approval

This form is a routing document for the approval of new and revised academic programs. Proposing department should complete this form. For more information, call the Faculty Senate Office at 831-2921.

Submitted by: Marika Ginsburg-Block phone number: 302-831-6631

Department: School of Education email address: marika@udel.edu_

Date: October 7, 2011

Action: Request for Permanent Status for Ed.S. Degree in School Psychoogy

(Example: add major/minor/concentration, delete major/minor/concentration, revise major/minor/concentration, academic unit name change, request for permanent status, policy change, etc.)

Effective term: 12S

(use format 04F, 05W)

Current degree: Ed.S.

(Example: BA, BACH, BACJ, HBA, EDD, MA, MBA, etc.)

Proposed change leads to the degree of: Ed.S.

(Example: BA, BACH, BACJ, HBA, EDD, MA, MBA, etc.)

Proposed name: Educational Specialist in School Psychology

Proposed new name for revised or new major / minor / concentration / academic unit

(if applicable)

Revising or Deleting:

Undergraduate major / Concentration:______________________________________

(Example: Applied Music – Instrumental degree BMAS)

Undergraduate minor:____________________________________________________

(Example: African Studies, Business Administration, English, Leadership, etc.)

Graduate Program Policy statement change: No change requested

(Must attach your Graduate Program Policy Statement)

Graduate Program of Study: Ed.S. School Psychology

(Example: Animal Science: MS Animal Science: PHD Economics: MA Economics: PHD)

Graduate minor / concentration:

Note: all graduate studies proposals must include an electronic copy of the Graduate Program Policy Document, highlighting the changes made to the original policy document.

List new courses required for the new or revised curriculum. How do they support the overall program objectives of the major/minor/concentrations)?

(Be aware that approval of the curriculum is dependent upon these courses successfully passing through the Course Challenge list. If there are no new courses enter “None”) None

Explain, when appropriate, how this new/revised curriculum supports the 10 goals of undergraduate education: http://www.ugs.udel.edu/gened/

N/A

Identify other units affected by the proposed changes:

(Attach permission from the affected units. If no other unit is affected, enter “None”)

None

Describe the rationale for the proposed program change(s):

(Explain your reasons for creating, revising, or deleting the curriculum or program.)

The Educational Specialist degree in school psychology was approved by the Faculty Senate in April 2005 to replace a certificate program in school psychology which was previously offered. The rationale for offering the Educational Specialist degree, based on our 2005 application was: “Students receive a Masters of Arts in School Psychology after the first year (30 credits) and a Specialist Certificate in School Psychology at the end of the third year (which includes a full year internship). Note that national accreditation requires a minimum of 60 credit hours. When recently (referring to the review conducted prior to 2005) accredited by NCATE and the National Association of School Psychologists, the accreditation agency recommended that students receive a degree, and not a certificate, upon completion of the 60 hour program. Note that many other universities offer a Specialist Degree in Education. Also note that a 30-hour Masters degree, by itself, would be inappropriate, and cost graduates a sizable amount of pay (i.e., salaries are often tied to a “Masters” regardless of the number of hours, but many school districts recognize the Specialist degree and pay accordingly). A Specialist Degree also would recognize that the graduates have completed far more than what is typically expected in a Masters program.”

Beginning with the graduating class of 2006, 45 students have graduated with their 30-credit Educational Specialist degrees from the University of Delaware after having obtained their 30-credit M.A. This degree is the trend followed by other top programs in school psychology. The Educational Specialist Program underwent extensive review by the NCATE and the National Association of School Psychologists receiving full program approval for the maximum allowable period of 5 years in 2006 and again in 2011. Thus, it is requested that the Senate consider granting permanent program status for the Educational Specialist Degree in School Psychology.

Program Requirements:

(Show the new or revised curriculum as it should appear in the Course Catalog. If this is a revision, be sure to indicate the changes being made to the current curriculum and include a side-by-side comparison of the credit distribution before and after the proposed change.)

N/A

ROUTING AND AUTHORIZATION: (Please do not remove supporting documentation.)

Department Chairperson Date

Dean of College Date

Chairperson, College Curriculum Committee___________________________________Date_____________________

Chairperson, Senate Com. on UG or GR Studies Date

Chairperson, Senate Coordinating Com. Date

Secretary, Faculty Senate Date

Date of Senate Resolution Date to be Effective

Registrar Program Code Date

Vice Provost for Academic Affairs & International Programs Date

Provost Date

Board of Trustee Notification Date

Revised 02/09/2009 /khs

FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION DRAFT

WHEREAS, the Educational Specialist Program in School Psychology was provisionally approved in April 2005, and

WHEREAS, at the end of the provisional period an external review team recommended that the Educational Specialist Program in School Psychology be given permanent status, and

WHEREAS, the Educational Specialist Program in School Psychology is one of a select few nationally accredited programs in the region, and

WHEREAS, the high quality of matriculated students has been demonstrated by the consistent receipt of more than 60 applications per year for 8 positions in the program, and

WHEREAS, the Educational Specialist Program in School Psychology is consistent with the Path to Prominence’s emphasis on becoming a premier graduate and professional education university that serves the state of Delaware, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that, effective immediately, the Educational Specialist Program in School Psychology be granted permanent status.

ORIGINAL PROGRAM PROPOSAL

ACADEMIC PROGRAM APPROVAL

CHECKLIST

This form is a routing document for the approval of new and revised academic programs. Page 2 will serve as an attachment to the Faculty Senate agenda. Proposing department should complete form, attach as a cover page and forward to the college dean. Documentation should include copy of curriculum as it is to appear in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalog. Proposals must arrive to the Undergraduate/Graduate Committee by November in order to reach the Faculty Senate by March 1. Proposals received after this date cannot be implemented the following year nor included in the catalog for that year.

1. Proposed change leads to the degree of

( ) Bachelor of Arts ( XX ) Master of Arts ( ) Doctor of Philosophy

( ) Bachelor of Science ( ) Master of Science (X ) Other: EDUCATIONAL SPECIALIST

2. ( ) New major/curriculum Title to be entered in record of students who select this program

( ) New minor Title to be entered in record of students who select this program

( ) Change from provisional to permanent status.

3. (x ) Revision of existing: (x ) major ( ) minor ( ) concentration

Present title M.A./SPECIALIST PROGRAM IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY

Records System Program Code

(XX ) Add/delete required courses/credit hours

( ) Add concentration Title

( ) Delete concentration Title

4. ( ) Deletion of existing/disestablish: ( ) major ( ) minor ( ) other _______________________________

Title Code______________________

5. ( ) Policy Change____________________________________________________________________________________

Title/Department

ROUTING AND APPROVALS: (Please do not remove supporting documentation.)

Department Chairperson Date

Dean of College Date

Chairperson, College Curriculum Committee___________________________________Date_____________________

Chairperson, Senate Com. on UG or GR Studies Date

Chairperson, Senate Coordinating Com. Date

Secretary, Faculty Senate Date

Date of Senate Resolution Date to be Effective

Registrar Program Code Date

Vice Provost for Academic Programs & Planning Date

Provost Date

Board of Trustee Notification Date

a. Rationale for creation, revision, or deletion:

The School of Education is requesting two changes to the current program:

Change #1: The school psychology program is a 3-year, 60 credit hour program. Students receive a Masters of Arts in School Psychology after the first year (30 credits) and a Specialist Certificate in School Psychology at the end of the third year (which includes a full year internship). Note that national accreditation requires a minimum of 60 credit hours. When recently accredited by NCATE and the National Association of School Psychologists, the accreditation agency recommended that students receive a degree, and not a certificate, upon completion of the 60 hour program. Note that many other universities offer a Specialist Degree in Education. Also note that a 30-hour Masters degree, by itself, would be inappropriate, and cost graduates a sizable amount of pay (i.e., salaries are often tied to a “Masters” regardless of the number of hours, but many school districts recognize the Specialist degree and pay accordingly). A Specialist Degree also would recognize that the graduates have completed far more than what is typically expected in a Masters program.

Thus, it is requested that the Senate consider granting the Educational Specialist Degree in School Psychology for graduates who complete the second and third year of the program. The coursework in these two years combine for a total of 30 credits. Thus, students who complete the three-year, 60 credit hour program would exit with a M.A. in School Psychology (conferred after the first year, 30 credit hours), and an Ed.S. in School Psychology (conferred after the third year, an additional 30 credit hours).

Change #2: EDUC 658: Classroom Management and Discipline would be added as an alternative of the currently required course EDUC 681: Techniques for Behavior Change. This change allows for greater flexibility in scheduling and is consistent with recent changes in the national program standards set by the National Association of School Psychologists and NCATE. That is, a course in behavior modification is not required and our program was encouraged during its recent accreditation review to offer greater training in the foundations of psychology and education (e.g., the educational psychology aspects of EDUC 658. This change also is consistent with recommendations of students in the program, as indicated in a recent survey.

Both courses are routinely offered. Thus, this change will not require additional resources.

b. Summary of program:

*FIRST YEAR: MASTERS OF ARTS

FALL CREDITS

EDUC 618 Special Services in the Schools 3

EDUC 817 Individual Intelligence Testing 3

EDUC 663 Counseling Skills Lab 3

EDUC 681 Techniques of Behavior Change OR

EDUC 658 Classroom Management and Discipline 3

WINTER SESSION

EDUC 623 Applied Human Development 3

EDUC 680 Educational Diagnosis 3

SPRING

EDUC 660 Educational Statistics and Measurement 3

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology 3

EDUC 679 Methods in Special Education 3

EDUC 814 Psychological Assessment of Children OR

PSYC 820 Psychodiagnostics: Objective Trait and Behavioral Assessment 3

TOTAL CREDITS FOR M.A. IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY 30

COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION REQUIRED AT END OF FIRST YEAR

*The completion of the M.A. does not convey certification as a school psychologist. To be certified, students must complete the second year coursework and a supervised internship and must then apply for certification in the state in which they wish to practice. The University’s Institutional Recommendation is issued at the successful completion of the supervised internship.

SECOND and THIRD YEARS: Education Specialist Degree in School Psychology

FALL CREDITS

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology 3

EDUC 691 Applied Statistics & Research Design 3

EDUC 831 Advanced Counseling Techniques 3

EDUC 870 Child Neuropsychology 3

SPRING

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology 3

EDUC 830 Consultation and Intervention 3

EDUC 813 Child Psychopathology 3

EDUC 651 School-based Family Issues and Interventions 3

THIRD YEAR:

EDUC 688 Internship in School Psychology 6

TOTAL CREDITS FOR EDUCATION SPECIALIST DEGREE 30

AUTHORIZED DEGREE TITLES

Please check the appropriate degree:

( ) Bachelor of Applied Science

( ) Bachelor of Arts

( ) Bachelor of Arts in Educational Studies

( ) Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Studies

( ) Bachelor of Chemical Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Civil Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Computer Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Electrical Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Environmental Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Fine Arts

( ) Bachelor of Liberal Studies

( ) Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering

( ) Bachelor of Music

( ) Bachelor of Science

( ) Bachelor of Science in Accounting

( ) Bachelor of Science in Agriculture

( ) Bachelor of Science in Business Administration

( ) Bachelor of Science in Education

( ) Bachelor of Science in Nursing

( ) Master of Applied Sciences

(XXX) Master of Arts

( ) Master of Arts in Liberal Studies

( ) Master of Business Administration

( ) Master of Chemical Engineering

( ) Master of Civil Engineering

( ) Master of Education

( ) Master of Electrical Engineering

( ) Master of Environmental and Energy Policy

( ) Master of Fine Arts

( ) Master of Instruction

( ) Master of Marine Policy

( ) Master of Materials Science and Engineering

( ) Master of Mechanical Engineering

( ) Master of Music

( ) Master of Physical Therapy

( ) Master of Public Administration

( ) Master of Science

( ) Master of Science in Nursing

( ) Doctor of Education

( ) Doctor of Philosophy

(XXX) Education Specialist

This document will be retained permanently in the Faculty Senate Office.

Revised 04/23/01

University of Delaware
School of Education
Master of Arts (M.A.) and

Educational Specialist (Ed.S.) in

School Psychology

Program Policy Statement

Part I. Program History

A. Purpose Statement
B. Origin of the Program
C. Administration and Faculty

D. Degrees Offered

Part II. Admission

A. University Policy on Admission
B. University Admission Procedures
C. Specific Requirements for Admission into the School Psychology Program
D. Admission Status

Part III. Degree Requirements

A. Course Requirements of the Specialist Program

B. Additional, Non-course Requirements of the Specialist Program

C. Practica and Internships

D. Portfolio Requirements of Internship

Part IV. General Information Relevant to the M.A. and Ed.S. in School Psychology

A. Financial Assistance
B. Application for Advanced Degree

C. Housing
D. Graduate Grade Point Average
E. Time Limits for the Completion of Degree Requirements
F. Extension of the Time Limit
G. Transfer of Credit Earned as a Continuing Education Student at the University of Delaware
H. Transfer of Credit from Another Institution
I. Transfer of Credit from the Undergraduate Division at the University of Delaware

Effective: Spring 2008

Part I. Program History

A. Purpose Statement

The school psychology "program" at the University of Delaware actually consists of two separate, yet closely interrelated degrees: the Masters of Arts degree (M.A.) in school psychology, completed by students after their first 30 credits of coursework and an Educational Specialist degree (Ed.S.) in school psychology, completed by students after their second 30 credits of coursework in the program. The program is designed to be a three year program with students completing the M.A. after the first year and the Ed.S. at the end of the third year. The third year of the program includes a full-time, year-long internship.

The program is grounded in the scientist/practitioner model in psychology, and committed to the School of Education's emphasis on the roles of Scholar, Problem Solver, and Partner. Students are provided with a strong foundation in psychological theory and research and are trained to use a collaborative, data-based problem solving approach when applying this foundation to help solve social, emotional, and academic problems faced by children, schools, and families. In addition to gaining theoretical and empirical knowledge, students acquire competencies in multiple skill areas, a problem solving mindset, and sensitivity and respect for cultural and individual diversity. Consistent with the scientist/practitioner model and the role of Scholar, students are also expected to contribute to the knowledge base in psychology and education -- an expectation that is most clear in the doctoral program. The program's philosophy is reflected in the following goals:

1. Students will adhere to the highest standards of ethical and professional conduct and will demonstrate respect for the dignity, worth, and individual differences of children of all cultures and backgrounds.

2. Students will use multiple methods of gathering reliable and valid data in the design and implementation of a variety of empirically-supported interventions for addressing problems faced by children, schools, and families.

3. Students will acquire an in-depth understanding of modern theories and research in the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional development of children, including knowledge of family and school systems, and will apply such knowledge to the practice of school psychology.

4. Students will develop a strong knowledge base specific to the profession of school psychology including its history and foundations, the various roles and functions of school psychologists, and alternative models by which services are delivered.

5. Students will acquire and apply specific competencies in school psychology, especially in the areas of assessment, consultation, prevention, and direct interventions, while using an ecological, problem-solving approach in the delivery of psychological services in the schools.

6. Students will acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to design and implement comprehensive mental health services, especially school-based services for promoting mental health and preventing social, emotional, and academic problems.

7. Students will work collaboratively and effectively with teachers, administrators, support staff, community agencies, children and their families, and others in the delivery of psychological services in the schools.

8. Students will apply a data-based, scientific problem solving approach to the delivery of all services, including assessment and intervention. Such services will be guided by current research and an appropriate assessment and analysis of multiple individual and ecological factors that influence learning and development. Evaluation data will be collected to demonstrate that services lead to positive outcomes. Where appropriate, students will use technology effectively in the delivery of assessment and intervention services, including in the acquisition and communication of information.

9. Students will develop sufficient knowledge and skills in research, statistics, and evaluation and apply such knowledge and skills in the design and evaluation of programs and services in the schools. Technology will be used effectively in research, statistics, and evaluation.

B. Origin of the Program

The specialist-level program was first established in 1981, with the first class consisting of two students admitted in the fall of 1982. From 1981 to 1983, the program had two part-time faculty members in school psychology. At that time it was envisioned that the program would train school psychologists for the state of Delaware, and would eventually become nationally accredited. The program obtained permanent status from the University in 1984 and gained national approval from the National Association of School Psychologists in 1994. Currently, there are three faculty members assigned primarily to the school psychology program and an enrollment of 23 full-time students.

C. Administration and Faculty

The Committee on Graduate Studies in Education is the SOE-level committee that administers all the graduate programs, including the School Psychology Program. The committee is composed of five faculty members from the SOE, a graduate student member selected by the Education Graduate Association, and the Assistant Director of the SOE, who also serves as the SOE Graduate Coordinator.

The SOE is committed to the recruitment, support, and retention of full-time, tenure-line faculty members in the area of special education. Faculty members who teach graduate courses and advise graduate students in the SOE must have a doctorate or equivalent. In some instances, persons with a master’s degree and special expertise in a relevant area of Education as a result of concentrated study, employment experience, or service may be recommended for graduate teaching. In such cases, the faculty member must have a record of successful teaching in the relevant area of Education, proven scholarly ability, and the endorsement of the School Psychology faculty and the SOE Director.

School Psychology faculty members review candidates for admission to the program in School Psychology, serve as advisors to candidates admitted to the program, teach courses in the program, and evaluate candidates’ exhibits, practica, internships, and other performance products.

D. Degrees Offered

The degrees awarded to candidates who complete this program are an Master of Arts (M.A.) in School Psychology followed by an Educational Specialist (Ed.S.) in School Psychology.

Part II. Admission

A. University Policy on Admission

Admission to the graduate program is competitive. Those who meet stated minimum requirements are not guaranteed admission, nor are those who fail to meet all of those requirements necessarily precluded from admission if they offer other appropriate strengths.

B. University Admission Procedures

Applicants must submit all of the following items to the Office of Graduate Studies before admission is considered:

Completed applications are due by February 1 for admission in the subsequent Fall semester. Admission application forms are available from the Office of Graduate Studies, from the departments, and online (http://www.udel.edu/admissions/appinfo.html).

A $60 nonrefundable application fee must be submitted with the application. Checks must be made payable to the University of Delaware. Applications received without the application fee will not be processed. Foreign students may utilize either a check or an International Postal Money Order to remit payment in U.S. currency.

An official transcript of all previous college records must be sent directly from the institution to the Office of Graduate Studies. Students who have attended the University of Delaware need not supply a transcript from Delaware. Transcripts issued in a language other than English must be accompanied by an official translation into English. If the rank of the student is not displayed on the transcript or diploma, an official letter of explanation and ranking from the institution where the degree was earned is required.

Applicants must submit at least three letters of recommendation. The School Psychology faculty recommend that these letters be written by teaching supervisors and professors who know the applicant well.

If English is not their first language, international student applicants must demonstrate a satisfactory level of proficiency in the English language on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). The TOEFL is offered by the Educational Testing Service in test centers throughout the world. TOEFL scores that are more than two years old are not acceptable. In order for a student visa to be issued, international students first must be offered admission to the University and provide evidence of adequate financial resources. The University has been authorized under federal law to enroll non-immigrant alien students. International students are required to purchase the University-sponsored insurance plan or its equivalent.

It is a Delaware State Board of Health Regulation and a University of Delaware mandate that all entering graduate students born after January 1, 1957 give proof of proper immunization for measles, mumps, and rubella. If immunization requirements are not met, the student will not be eligible to register. Specific information may be obtained from the Student Health Service at 302-831-2226.

C. Specific Requirements for Admission into the School Psychology Program

The School Psychology Program seeks candidates for admission with qualities that will enable them to become outstanding school psychologists. School psychologists must have the skills to analyze educational problems at all levels of the system; design, implement, and evaluate interventions to prevent or solve these problems; and collaborate with families, educators, and community members to promote healthy educational and psychological outcomes for all children. Therefore, we seek candidates who demonstrate the following dispositions:

Approach new experiences with initiative, enthusiasm, flexibility, dedication, and willingness to learn
Engage in thoughtful analysis of performance, seek feedback, and incorporate suggestions into work
Are eager to learn, recognize that learning is never completed, and are committed to lifelong professional development
Have excellent critical thinking and writing skills
Enjoy working with children, parents, and educators
View all children, families, and educators as having strengths and a capacity to learn and change; embrace diversity as a source of enrichment rather than deficit; treat others with respect and a desire to understand their points of view
Are committed to ethical practices and to serving as agents of renewal and change within schools and communities
Value working collaboratively with students, families, educators, and the wider community in the pursuit of common goals
Understand that practice must be based in sound scholarship, viewing themselves as both producers and consumers of scholarly knowledge
Are committed to the profession of school psychology and seek to make contributions to the field.

Applicants are judged individually. However, the following are required and guide the admission process:

An undergraduate degree, preferably with a major in psychology or education, with at least three course in psychology (preferably in child development, educational psychology, statistics or abnormal psychology)
A minimum grade point average of at least 3.0 in all undergraduate and graduate course work. (Note, however, that during the past 5 years, nearly all admitted students had a GPA above 3.2 and the average was 3.5)
A grade point average of at least 3.0 in all graduate work completed

Submission of GRE verbal and quantitative scores. A total of 1000 is required. (Note that the scores of students admitted to the program during the past few years have averaged about 1150)
Submission of personal statement and goals (on application form)
Submission of three letters of recommendation
Evidence of proficiency in English. TOEFL scores are required for foreign students. A minimum score of 600 (paper-based test) or 250 (computer-based test) must be obtained.
Evidence of the dispositions cited above in the applicant's written statements and interview

Courses designed to remediate deficiencies in an applicant's background may be required. Credit for these courses would not apply to the program's required credit hours.

The School of Education will accept as many as 9 graduate credits toward the Master's degree. Applicants should inquire about possible transfer credits early in the admissions process because certain courses may not be taken elsewhere.

Deadline for application: February 1 (Note this has been changed to January 15^th to enable a more thorough review)

Review of applications

Students' applications are reviewed by at least two faculty members. Approximately 15 of the most promising candidates are selected for personal interviews. Candidates' grades, test scores, letters of recommendation, and personal statements are reviewed for evidence of the qualities and predispostions listed above.
The interview process consists of three components. First, students participate in a small group orientation (usually about five students are included in a group). During this process, candidates introduce themselves to each other, listen to a presentation about the program from faculty, and ask questions about the program. Second, candidates participate in a series of 15-20 minute individual interviews with at least two faculty members. Third, candidates have the opportunity to talk with one or two current students in the program. The first two portions of the interview are evaluative; candidates' statements, questions, and interactional style are observed for evidence of the qualities and predispostions listed below. The third part of the interview is confidential. This conversation allows candidates to receive candid information about the program without concern for how their questions might be perceived by faculty.
Following the interviews, candidates are 1) offered admission, 2) placed on the waiting list, or 3) not accepted. Each year's entering class consists of 6-10 students. There is no provisional acceptance.
Please note that admission to the program is competitive. Those who meet stated requirements are not guaranteed admission, nor are those who fail to meet all of those requirements necessarily precluded from admission if they offer other appropriate strengths.

D. Admission Status

Students admitted into any of the School Psychology degree programs are only admitted on a full-time basis with regular (non-provisional) status. Regular status is offered to students who meet all of the established entrance requirements and who have the ability, interest, and commitment necessary for successful study at the graduate level in a degree program.

Part III. Degree Requirements

A. Course Requirements for the M.A. and Ed.S. degrees in School Psychology

The Specialist program requires three years of full-time study. With special permission from the student's advisor and program coordinator, the equivalent of one year of coursework may be completed part-time. Upon completion of the first year of coursework (30 credits) and passing of a comprehensive exam, students are awarded a Master’s of Arts in School Psychology. All students are expected to continue their studies to earn the Educational Specialist degree in School Psychology, which requires 30 additional credits including a 1,200-hour internship. It is only upon completion of the full 60-hour integrated program that a student is eligible for certification as a school psychologist in Delaware as well as most other states.

Specialist Curriculum

First Year (Master's Level)

Fall

EDUC 618 Special Services in the Schools

EDUC 663 Counseling Skills Laboratory

EDUC 817 Individual Intelligence Testing

EDUC 744 Educational Measurement and Progress Monitoring

Winter Session (or Summer)

EDUC 623 Applied Human Development in the Schools

EDUC 814 Psychological Assessment of Children

Spring

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology

EDUC 679 Instructing Elementary/Middle Schoolers with Mild Disabilities

EDUC 870 Child Neuropsychology

EDUC 830 Consultation and Intervention: School Discipline

Comprehensive Examination

Master of Arts (M.A.) Degree conferred

Second Year (Specialist level)

Fall

EDUC 831 Advanced Counseling Techniques

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology

EDUC 813 Childhood Psychopathology

EDUC 691 Applied Statistics and Research Design

Spring

EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology

EDUC 651 School-Based Family Issues and Interventions

EDUC 841 Consultation and Intervention: Mental Health

EDUC 842 Assessment of Special Populations

Third Year

EDUC 688 Internship in School Psychology (3 credits per semester)

Note: Students who choose to enroll for 3 credits of internship may not be considered “full-time students” for the purpose of deferring student loans. Students are responsible for determining their loan status.

Educational Specialist (Ed.S.) Degree conferred

B. Additional, Non-Course Requirements for the Specialist Program

Minimum GPA of 3.5

Students must maintain a minimum cumulative grade point average of 3.5 to be eligible for the Master's degree and Educational Specialist degree. Students also must obtain a grade of B- or higher in each practica in order to advance to the next level of the program. Additionally, a grade of B- or higher is required during each semester of the internship in order to complete the program and receive the Educational Specialist degree. Note that proficiency in oral and written expression in English is among the requirements for a grade of B- in practica and the internship.

Comprehensive Examination

The comprehensive examination is usually administered to first-year students during the last week of the Spring semester. Alternate exam times are sometimes arranged for students who wish to participate in Winter or Summer graduation. The exam consists of several essay questions covering material from first-year courses. Successful completion of the exam and coursework results in the Master of Arts degree. The exam is graded by two or more members of the school psychology faculty. Student identities are masked for the purpose of exam grading. Students failing the exam are given the opportunity to take a second exam. At the discretion of the faculty, this second exam may cover all or part of the first year course material and may be written and/or oral. Students must pass the second administration in order to continue in the program.

Residency Requirement

All students must complete a full-time residency. Minimally, at the Specialist level students are required to spend one, continuous year (Fall semester, Spring semester) of full-time course work in the program. This does not include the internship. Full time work is defined as completing nine credit hours per semester. It is strongly recommended that both years of coursework be completed on a full-time basis.

E. Practica And Internship

Practica

Carefully constructed practica (3 courses for a total of 9 credits) are a part of every student's program. These practica are in addition to practicum experiences embedded within certain courses (i.e., assessment, counseling, consultation, and intervention courses). The first practicum orients students to the educational process and gives them the opportunity to practice diagnostic assessment skills. In the second and third practica, students refine their assessment skills and develop expertise in direct and indirect intervention (e.g., individual and group counseling, teacher and family consultation, design and implementation of behavior management programs).

Practicum assignments are made by faculty to ensure that students gain experience with a variety of ages, cultures, and disabilities. Most practica are completed in regular school settings; however, one practicum may be completed in a more "specialized" setting, such as programs for children with physical and/or sensory impairments, alternative schools, schools for children with autism or other severe disabilities. Students interested in a particular area should discuss possible placements with the University practicum supervisor. Supervision is provided on-site by a certified school psychologist; students also attend weekly group supervision meetings with a University faculty member.

Proficiency in English expression, both oral and written, is required for all practica and internship placements (as well as for graduation).

Internship

For students in the Educational Specialist degree, an internship is completed in the third year of training. The objective of the internship is to insure competency and integration of knowledge and skills in all domains of school psychology and to broaden such knowledge and skills.

The internship requires full-time participation, five days per week for one academic year. Interns must log a minimum of 1,200 clock hours for the Educational Specialist degree. Under unusual circumstances, and with permission of the program faculty, the internship may be completed over a two year period. At least one-half of the clock hours must be completed in a school setting. Internship sites follow guidelines established by the National Association of School Psychologists, and a plan of objectives and activities that are delineated and evaluated on the Field Experience Checklist and Evaluation Form. As described in the Internship Guidelines, a written contract between the university, internship site, and intern must be formalized prior to beginning an internship. Students typically handle a case load roughly half of that required for a certified school psychologist. They must participate in a minimum of 4 hours of weekly supervision from a certified school psychologist (or someone with other appropriate credentials for placements in non-school settings) and log at least 1,200 clock hours that document a full range of experiences and services with a diverse population of students.

Finding an appropriate internship site is the joint responsibility of the university supervisor and the student. While every effort is made to arrange for a paid internship, paid internships are not guaranteed. However, over the past ten years all interns have been offered paid internships (averaging about $16,000). Students have completed their internships in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Virginia, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, and Alaska.

Placements must be approved by the university supervisor. Although the supervisor attempts to place interns in locations that they most desire, the program's obligations to local school districts must be respected. As such, the University may require that an internship be completed in a local school district. Likewise, quality of the site is always considered to be more important than a high salary.

F. Portfolio Requirements Of Internship

Students are required to develop a portfolio of documents that demonstrate their competence as a reflective practitioner of school psychology. The portfolio will be used, in part, to establish the grade for the internship. The items selected for the portfolio are examples of their very best work and should clearly demonstrate mastery of the skills involved. The primary purpose of the portfolio is not to help students improve their skills, but for them to demonstrate the skills they have developed over the past 2 years as well as during the internship.

Professional Development Goals and Activities: Students develop a set of two to four goals for their professional development for the year and a sequence of activities designed to address those goals.

Report Writing: Students submit a completed psychoeducational evaluation report that demonstrates their ability to conduct a comprehensive assessment that is linked to intervention.

Counseling: Students submit a videotape of a counseling session with a student, along with progress notes on the session

Consultation: Students submit a videotape of a problem-solving consultation session with a teacher.

Comprehensive Assessment/Intervention Case Study: Students submit a complete case study demonstrating that they possess the knowledge and professional expertise to collaborate with teachers, families and other professionals in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions that effectively respond to the educational and mental health needs of children and youth.

Special Project: This project involves an activity outside the “day-to-day” assessment/intervention work of most school psychologists. That is, it should be concerned with an issue at the school or district level (i.e., systems level). The content of the project is open, but it is highly recommended that the project reflect student contributions to prevention or intervention programs concerning social, emotional, or academic development. The focus might be the student’s involvement in school policies, needs assessment, program design, program implementation, or program evaluation.

Passing score on the PRAXIS exam in school psychology. Students are required to achieve a passing score (660) on the National School Psychology Examination administered by the Educational Testing Service.

Part IV. General Information Relevant to M.A. and Ed.S. Degree Candidates

A. Financial Assistance

Over the past five years or so, more than 75% of students in the school psychology program have received either a Teaching Assistantship (TA) or a Research Assistantship (RA). During the past 3 years, all students have received either a TA or RA. TA and RA positions require 20 hours work per week. Students with TA and RA positions receive tuition remission during the regular semesters (but not during Winter Session or Summer sessions) and receive approximately $16,000 in support per year. Although every effort is made to find assistantships for returning students, students receiving a TA or RA one year are not guaranteed support the next year.

The majority of students in good standing typically receive financial support from either the School of Education or from various research and teaching centers associated with CEHD and the School of Education. Centers that often award assistantships to school psychology students are the Center for Disability Studies, the Center for Educational Research and Development, and the Delaware Center for Teacher Education.

a. RA Positions. Students work on faculty projects for 20 hours per week. An attempt is made to match faculty and student interests, but students should consider this opportunity to develop competencies in new areas. Assignments are made by the Director of the School of Education, subject to the approval of the faculty member(s) directing the research project.

b. TA positions. Students assist in teaching undergraduate and/or graduate courses. Students may prepare and grade examinations under the supervision of the instructor, handle routine class procedures, counsel and tutor students, and possibly conduct classes. In some cases, time is split between two or more courses, but the total workload will not exceed 20 hours per week.

For questions or concerns about assistantships and fellowships, please contact Dr. Gail Rys in the School of Education.

Students who do not receive an assistantship often work part-time, but no more than 20 hours per week. In the past, several school psychology students without assistantships have worked on-campus as resident hall directors and in other departments, such as admissions, student services, and financial aid. Interviews for Residence Hall assistantships usually begin in early April. Interested students should contact the Office of Residence Life (831-1201).

B. Application for Advanced Degree

To initiate the process for degree conferral, candidates must submit an "Application for Advanced Degree" to the Office of Graduate Studies. The application deadlines are February 15 for Spring candidates, May 15 for Summer candidates, and September 15 for Winter candidates. The application must be signed by the candidate's adviser and by the Director or the Assistant Director of the School of Education. There is an application fee of $35 for master's degree candidates and a $95 fee for doctoral degree candidates. Payment is required when the application is submitted.

C. Housing

An Off-Campus Housing Service is provided by the Office of Residence Life, which is located at 5 Courtney Street (off of Academy Street; across the street from the Student Center Parking Lot exit). The service provides a list of rooms, apartments, and houses available for renting or sharing. Listings are updated on a weekly basis. Housing lists can be obtained through the mail or at the office.

On-campus graduate housing is available for married and single graduate students in the form of one- and two-bedroom apartments. For a brochure and application form contact http://www.udel.edu/hcs/housing/rental/.

D. Graduate Grade Point Average

Students must have a minimum overall cumulative grade point average of 3.0 to be eligible for the degree. In addition, the grades in courses applied toward the degree program must equal at least 3.0. All graduate-numbered courses taken with graduate student classification at the University of Delaware are applied to the cumulative index. Credit hours and courses for which the grade is below “C-“ do not count toward the degree even though the grade is applied to the overall index. Candidates should check to be certain that their instructors have submitted all final grades.

E. Time Limits for the Completion of Degree Requirements

Time limits for the completion of degree requirements begin with the date of matriculation and are specifically expressed in the student’s letter of admission. The University policy for students entering a master’s degree program is ten consecutive semesters to complete the degree requirements. Students who change their degree plan and have transferred from one degree program to another degree program are given ten consecutive semesters from the beginning of the first year in the latest program.

F. Extension of the Time Limit

An extension of time limit may be granted for circumstances beyond the student’s control. Requests for time extensions must be made in writing and approved by the student’s adviser and the Director or Assistant Director of the School of Education. The Director/Assistant Director will forward the request to the Office of Graduate Studies. The Office of Graduate Studies will determine the student’s eligibility for a time extension and will notify the student in writing of its decision to grant an extension of time.

G. Transfer of Credit Earned as a Continuing Education Student at the University of Delaware

Students who complete graduate credits with the classification of CEND (Continuing Education Nondegree) at the University of Delaware may use a maximum of 9 graduate credits earned with this classification toward their graduate degree. The CEND credits, grades, and quality points become a part of the student's academic record and grade point average. CEND credit can be transferred provided that: (a) the course was at the 600 or 800 level, (b) the course was taken within the time limit appropriate for the degree, (c) the course was approved by the student's adviser and the Director/Assistant Director of the School of Education, and (d) the course was in accord with the requirements for the degree.

H. Transfer of Credit from Another Institution

Graduate credit earned at another institution will be evaluated at the written request of the student. Such a request should be submitted first to his or her advisor using a Request for Transfer of Graduate Credit form. A maximum of 9 credits required for the degree will be accepted provided that such credits: (a) were earned with a grade of no less than B-, (b) are approved by the student's adviser and the Director/Assistant Director of the School of Education, (c) are in accord with the requirements of the degree, (d) are not older than five years, and (e) were completed at an accredited college or university. The credits, but not the grades or quality points, are transferable to University of Delaware graduate records. Graduate courses counted toward a degree received elsewhere may not be used. Credits earned at another institution while the student was classified as a continuing education student at that institution are not eligible to be transferred to one's graduate degree at the University of Delaware. Credits from institutions outside of the United States are generally not transferable to the University of Delaware.

I. Transfer of Credit from the Undergraduate Division at the University of Delaware

Students who wish to transfer credits from their undergraduate record to their graduate record may transfer a limited number by arranging with the department to have these courses approved by their instructors before the courses are taken. These courses must be at the 600-level, and the student must perform at the graduate level. They must be in excess of the total required for the baccalaureate degree, must have grades of no less than B-, and must not be older than five years. The credits, grades, and quality points will transfer.

ASSESSMENT OF LIBRARY RESOURCES

SELF STUDY REPORT for the

Educational Specialist in School Psychology Program

Prepared by Marika Ginsburg-Block Ph.D., Program Coordinator

Fall 2011

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY

The school psychology program at the University of Delaware was first established in 1981, with the first class consisting of two students admitted in the fall of 1982. From 1981 to 1983, the program had two part-time faculty members in school psychology. At that time it was envisioned that the program would train school psychologists for the state of Delaware, and would eventually become nationally accredited. The Specialist program (previously the certificate program and since 2005 the degree program) has been approved by the National Association of School Psychologists since 1994. Three faculty members are assigned full-time to the school psychology program. Adjunct faculty and faculty in other program areas (e.g., special education, measurement) also teach courses in the program.

The School Psychology Program is based on the Standards for School Psychology Training Programs developed by the National Association of School Psychologists (2000). The program is grounded in the scientist/practitioner model in psychology, and committed to the School of Education's emphasis on the roles of Scholar, Problem Solver, and Partner. Students are provided with a strong foundation in psychological theory and research and are trained to use a collaborative, data-based problem solving approach when applying this foundation to help solve social, emotional, and academic problems faced by children, schools, and families. In addition to gaining theoretical and empirical knowledge, students acquire competencies in multiple skill areas, a problem solving mindset, and sensitivity and respect for cultural and individual diversity. Consistent with the scientist/practitioner model and the role of Scholar, students are also expected to contribute to the knowledge base in psychology and education -- an expectation that is most clear in the doctoral program. The program's philosophy is reflected in the following goals:

8. Students will apply a data-based, scientific problem solving approach to the delivery of all services, including assessment and intervention. Such services will be guided by current research and an appropriate assessment and analysis of multiple individual and ecological factors that influence learning and development. Evaluation data will be collected to demonstrate that services lead to positive outcomes. Where appropriate, students will use technology effectively in the delivery of assessment and intervention services, including on the acquisition and communication of information.

10. Students will develop the knowledge and skills in technology to apply in assessment, record keeping, communication, intervention, research, statistics, and evaluation, as well as other areas related to school psychological services.

11. An additional goal for students in the Ph.D. program is that they will conduct scholarly research in which they demonstrate competence in identifying critical problems in education and psychology, reviewing and integrating existing research, designing studies and experiments that competently address such problems, collecting and analyzing data using a variety of modern statistical procedures, and formally communicating results to other researchers and practitioners.

Approved by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), the program balances applied skills with the related knowledge of research and theory. Unlike many other programs, students acquire approximately 1,800 hours of field experience through practicum and internship experiences in diverse settings. Although most hours are spent in culturally diverse public schools, students may work in mental health centers, hospitals, alternative programs, and various other settings committed to the mental health and education of children and families, including schools for low incidence disabilities. In each of these settings students apply and extend the knowledge and skills learned in their coursework. Further, in each setting students gain greater recognition and appreciation of individual differences. Note that our practica requirements greatly exceed those required by NASP and most other training programs -- and, our students have viewed this as a major strength of our program.

Each year, approximately 8 outstanding students are admitted to the Specialist level. Currently, approximately 24 full-time students (including interns) are enrolled. As a result, classes which are shared with Doctoral level students (no more than 2) are very small, fostering not only quality instruction but also the development of close student/student and faculty/student relationships.

UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC PRIORITIES

The Specialist Program in School Psychology intersects strategically with all 5 of the Universities Path to Prominence guiding principles. Addressing the notion of Delaware First, the program is the only program of its kind in Delaware. In recent years, although our matriculated students come to us from across the country and world, a significant and unprecedented number of Ed.S. graduates have chosen to pursue employment in Delaware (80% over the past two years as opposed to 40% in 2006). We attribute this to the strong connections we have established with local schools where our graduates are in high demand, coupled with the economic outlook in other states as far as educational hiring practices. This contributes greatly to the Delaware schools by providing them with highly qualified professionals. Reciprocally, the University benefits through increased training opportunities in the future as we place new students with our newly minted professionals for field-based experiences. Currently many of our highest demand supervisors are indeed past graduates of our program.

Regarding Diversity, our program brings in students from around the country and world (e.g. Turkey, China) from different racial and ethnic backgrounds. The study if school psychology is truly the study of human differences. Our students experience working in Delaware schools serving K-12 students from diverse economic, racial, sexual orientation, linguistic, and disability backgrounds.

Regarding Partnerships, the School Psychology Program has relationships with all of the school districts in New Castle County, as well as several in southern Delaware. Delaware districts provide field-based training opportunities for our practicum students, as well as paid internship sites for our interns during their third year of study. This fall we initiated a partnership with the Department of Education through Dr. Mike Stetter, Director of Accountability. He is going to provide an internship rotation through the DOE for two of our lucky interns.

The principles of Engagement and Impact fit quite well with the field of school psychology and our graduate program which addresses vexing barriers to student achievement by training highly qualified personnel to provide leadership in the provision of school-based mental health services to K-12 students. Our graduates are currently employed as school psychologists across the country. They are serving as lead psychologists in their districts and as state leaders in their professional organizations. They are engaging in much needed work in the field of education and making an impact. For example, here in Delaware graduates of our program are advising the state DOE on the development of its system for annual appraisals of school psychologists and partnering with the DOE and Autism Delaware to provide state-wide inservice opportunities.

GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS

The Educational Specialist in School Psychology degree program is a graduate program and does not enroll undergraduates, thus fulfillment of general education requirements is not applicable here.

CURRICULAR REQUIREMENTS

Please note that these requirements are taken from our student handbook and written for our students, thus when the text refers to “you” we mean our students.

The Specialist program requires three years of full-time study. With special permission from the student's advisor and program coordinator, the equivalent of one year of coursework may be completed part-time. Upon completion of the first year of coursework (30 credits) and passing of a comprehensive exam, students are awarded a Master of Arts (M.A.) in School Psychology. All students are expected to continue their studies to earn the Educational Specialist Degree in School Psychology, which requires 30 additional credits including a 1,200-hour internship. It is only upon completion of the full 60-hour integrated program that a student is eligible for certification as a school psychologist in Delaware as well as most other states.

Coursework for Specialist Students

Please note that there are several changes that appear to the required coursework leading to the MA and Specialist Degrees as compared to the 2005 Faculty Senate Request Form (see pages 8-10 of this report). These changes were submitted during the fall of 2007 and approved by the Faculty Senate in Spring 2008 and are listed in the Prograsm Policy Statement.

First Year (Master's Level)

During the first year, you complete the following coursework during the Fall, Spring, and Winter or Summer session. During the session in which you take your final course, you become eligible to take the comprehensive exam. Passing this exam qualifies you to receive your Master's degree.

Fall Semester (12 credits)

§ EDUC 618: Introduction to School Psychology

§ EDUC 663: Counseling Skills Laboratory

§ EDUC 817: Individual Intelligence Testing

§ EDUC 744: Educational Measurement and Progress Monitoring

Winter Session (6 credits)

§ EDUC 814: Psychological Assessment of Children

§ EDUC 623: Applied Human Development

Spring Semester (12 Credits)

§ EDUC 671: Practicum in School Psychology

§ EDUC 679: Instructing Elementary/Middle Schoolers with Mild Disabilities

§ EDUC 830: Consultation and Intervention: School Discipline

§ EDUC 870: Child Neuropsychology

Second Year (Specialist level)

In the second year, students complete the following Specialist coursework, which includes the practica:

Fall Semester (12 credits)

§ EDUC 831: Advanced Counseling Techniques

§ EDUC 671: Practicum in School Psychology

§ EDUC 691: Applied Statistics and Research Design

§ EDUC 813: Child Psychopathology

Spring Semester (12 Credits)

§ EDUC 671: Practicum in School Psychology

§ EDUC 651: School-Based Family Issues and Interventions

§ EDUC 841: Consultation and Intervention: Mental Health

§ EDUC 842: Assessment of Special Populations

Third Year (Internship)

During the third and final year of the School Psychology Specialist Program, students complete the following requirements:

§ Enroll in EDUC 688: Internship in School Psychology, for 3 credits or 6 credits per semester

§ Pass the PRAXIS Exam in School Psychology

§ Complete the portfolio and have it approved

§ Complete the Application for Advanced Degree for conferral of the Specialist Degree

Note: Students who choose to enroll for 3 credits of internship may not be considered "full-time students" for the purpose of deferring student loans. Students are responsible for determining their loan status.

Minimum GPA of 3.5

Students must maintain a minimum cumulative grade point average of 3.5 to be eligible for the Master's and Specialist degree. Students also must obtain a grade of B- or higher in each practica in order advance to the next level of the program. Additionally, a grade of B- or higher is required during each semester of the internship in order to complete the program and receive the Specialist degree. Note that proficiency in oral and written expression in English is among the requirements in practica and the internship.

Comprehensive Examination

The comprehensive examination is administered to first-year students, usually during the last week of the Spring semester. Alternate exam times are sometimes arranged for students who wish to participate in Winter or Summer graduation. The exam consists of several essay questions covering material from first-year courses. Successful completion of the exam and coursework results in the Master of Arts degree. The exam is graded by two or more members of the school psychology faculty. Student identities are masked for the purpose of exam grading. Students failing the exam are given the opportunity to take a second exam. At the discretion of the faculty, this second exam may cover all or part of the first year course material and may be written and/or oral. Students must pass the second administration in order to continue in the program.

Practica

Three carefully constructed practica (3 separate courses for a total of 9 credits) are a part of every student's program. The first practicum course orients students to the educational process and focuses on assessment skills. In addition to administering and interpreting a variety of assessment tools, students implement an academic intervention with an individual child and conduct a functional behavior assessment linked to intervention. In the second and third practica, students refine their assessment skills and develop expertise in direct and indirect interventions (e.g., individual and group counseling, teacher and family consultation, design and implementation of behavior management programs, social skills training). Practicum experiences also are embedded with more content-based courses. For example, during the first semester students shadow and interview a school psychologist and administer a variety of intelligence tests.

Practicum assignments are made by faculty to ensure that students gain experience with children of a variety of ages, cultures, and disabilities. Practica require 2 full days per week and are completed in regular school settings; however, one practicum may be completed in a more "specialized" setting, such as programs for children with physical and/or sensory impairments, alternative schools, schools for children with autism or other severe disabilities. Students interested in a particular area should discuss possible placements with the University practicum supervisor. Supervision is provided on-site by a certified school psychologist; students also attend weekly group supervision meetings with a University faculty member.

Internship

For students in the specialist program, an internship is completed in the third year of training. Doctoral students complete the internship during the fifth year in the program. The objective of the internship is to insure competency and integration of knowledge and skills in all domains of school psychology and to broaden such knowledge and skills.

The internship is a culminating experience during which students not only continue to develop a full range of competencies across all domains of school psychology practice, but more importantly demonstrate the integration and application of such competencies. The internship requires full-time participation, five days per week for one academic year. Interns must log a minimum of 1,200 clock hours (1,500 for Ph.D.). Internship sites follow guidelines established by the National Association of School Psychologists, as outlined in the Internship Guidelines.

A plan of objectives and activities, which are consistent with goals of the program, are delineated and evaluated on the Field Experience Checklist and Evaluation Form. As described in the Internship Guidelines, a written contract between the University, internship site, and intern must be formalized prior to beginning an internship. This contract states the responsibilities of the training program, the internship site, and the intern. The internship is a collaboration between the training program and field site program. A written plan specifies the responsiblities of the training program and internship site in providing supervision, support, and both formative and summative performance-based evaluation of intern performance. Students typically handle a case load roughly half of that required for a certified school psychologist. They must participate in a minimum of 4 hours of weekly supervision from a certified school psychologist (or someone with other appropriate credentials for placements in non-school settings) and log at least 1,200 clock hours (1,500 for Ph.D.) that document a full range of experiences and services with a diverse population of students. During the internship, competencies in the domains of school psychology are assessed not only by field supervisors using the Field Experience Checklist Evaluation Form, but also by the University supervisors' evalution of a comprehensive portfolio that includes counseling and consultation tapes, a psychological report, a comprehensive case study (documenting positive outcomes), documentation of professional development activities, and a PowerPoint presentation (to school psychologists and students) on a system-wide intervention or evaluation project that they completed.

Placements must be approved by the university supervisor. Although the supervisor attempts to place interns in locations that they most desire, the program's obligations to local school districts must be respected. As such, the University may require that an internship be completed in a local school district. Likewise, quality of the site is always considered to be more important than a high salary.

RESULTS OF PROGRAM QUALITY ASSESSMENTS

‘

Assessment data are continuously collected throughout the three-year program and used to make improvements. NASP/NCATE requires the use of 6-8 program assessments (7 & 8 are optional) to indicate program quality. The assessments we use for this purpose are the 1) Praxis II National Examination in School Psychology, 2) course grades, 3) practicum and 4) internship ratings by field supervisors, 5) a 5-item internship portfolio,6) a comprehensive case study (which is also part of the internship portfolio), and 7) alumni surveys. A list of these assessments including a brief description and timeline for administration can be found in this report (See Other Information, page 44). Three years of cohort data for each assessment along with a brief analysis of this data may be found in this report (See Other Information sections A through H, beginning on page 47).

We also rely on the following additional assessments for program improvement:

1. Course and Instructor Evaluations. As required by the University, students complete a course and instructor evaluation form (now on-line) at the end of each course. We take these evaluations seriously. Results are reviewed by the individual faculty member and by the Director of the School of Education, both of whom examine aggregated scores as well as written comments from students. This information is used not only to improve courses and instruction, but also is used to help determine the promotion and salaries of individual, full-time faculty members.

2. Candidate Evaluations of Field Supervisors and Placements. In addition to evaluating courses and course instructors, candidates are required to evaluate practica and internship placements and the respective supervisors. Evaluations are confidential and used by the university-based field supervisor and program coordinator to select and maintain quality sites. (See Program Handbook, Site Evaluation Form).

http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/appendix-c.html

3. Exit Interviews of Interns. Near the end of the internship, interns are interviewed individually and asked how the program might be improved.

Each fall, the above information is reviewed by the school psychology faculty. As seen in the results of the alumni surveys (See Other Information, page 97) feedback on the program has been very positive. In respect to feedback that has impacted our program, we have benefited mostly from responses to the exit interview and the survey of alumni. This is because the other assessments (i.e., the PRAXIS, course grades, field supervisor ratings, competency ratings by faculty, and internship portfolio requirements) have consistently been overwhelmingly positive, seldom providing much guidance with respect to the need for programmatic changes (with a few exceptions, as noted below). Feedback from the alumni survey and exit interviews from these two sources has been instrumental to several recent program changes. Based on the above sources, the following actions have been made to improve the program:

Content Knowledge

1. In response to several respondents indicating a need for greater attention to Response to Intervention (RTI), Curriculum Based Assessment (CBA), and academic interventions, in 2009 we replaced the course EDUC 680 Educational Diagnosis with EDUC 744 Educational Measurement and Progress Monitoring. We also included more on these topics in the first practicum EDUC 671, requiring additional readings and a field-based assignment (linked to the course, EDUC 679: Instructing Elementary/Middle Schoolers with Mild Disabilities, which is taken concurrently with the practicum) in which the candidate must assess a child and use on-going progress monitoring while implementing an academic intervention.

2. A recurrent recommendation in alumni surveys and exit interviews has been the need for a course on assessment and intervention for children with low incidence disabilities, especially children with autism. Thus, last year (spring, 2010) we implemented a newly required course, EDUC 842: Assessment of Special Populations. This new course, taught by an adjunct and graduate of our program who now works with children with low incidence disabilities, received extremely favorable reviews last spring.

3. In response to the 2008 alumni survey and exit interviews suggesting greater coverage of Domain 4 (Diversity), we not only added EDUC 842 (see response above) but also revised the course EDUC 651: School-Based Family Issues and Interventions, adding more on diversity (which is also covered in additional courses and field experiences). Reflecting the increased coverage of the topic of diversity, we changed the title to “Diversity and Family School Collaboration.”

4. In response to several respondents indicating the need for greater attention to Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) and behavior intervention plans, in 2008 we created a second consultation course. Previously, one consultation course was required, EDUC 830, Consultation and Intervention in the Schools. This was replaced by a new version of EDUC 830, entitled Consultation and Intervention: School Discipline (a course entitled EDUC 658, School Discipline and Classroom Management, was deleted, but with much of its content incorporated into the new EDUC 830). A second consultation course, EDUC 841: Consultation and Intervention: Mental Health, was added. As part of EDUC 830, and in the context of their first practicum (EDUC 679), candidates must conduct a comprehensive FBA and link it to a recommended behavior intervention plan. The following year, and in the context of their third practicum, candidates take EDUC 841, which requires a comprehensive FBA linked to actual interventions that candidates assist a teacher in implementing (via collaborative problem solving consultation). For both projects a written report (including a formal FBA and behavior intervention plan) and consultation video are required (the second project also requires results of progress monitoring).

5. The above addition of a second course in consultation also addressed the recommendation of several graduates that more attention be given to systems level consultation and to crisis intervention. The new course, EDUC 841: Consultation and Intervention: Mental Health, places increased attention on these two topics. This includes the requirement that students conduct a thorough needs assessment of the school in which they are placed for their third practicum and link the results to recommended system-level changes. The needs assessment includes mental health prevention and crisis response.

Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge, skill, and Dispositions

Nearly all of the above changes address not only content knowledge but also professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions (we find it very difficult to separate these from content knowledge). Candidates practice and demonstrate also professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions in their assessment and on-going progress monitoring of academic achievement in EDUC 679 and EDUC 744 (see response #1 above). They also demonstrate professional and pedagogic al knowledge, skill, and dispositions (via required video) in EDUC 830 and 841 (see response #4 above).

Student Learning

In the projects cited above, candidates are required to demonstrate the impact of interventions on student learning. For example, in EDUC 679 candidates monitor and assess the impact of academic interventions that they implement and in EDUC 841 they assess the impact of interventions targeting behavior problems that are implemented via collaborative problem solving consultation (these are in addition to comprehensive case study required in internship).

External Evaluation Results

The extent to which our Specialist Program meets NASP/NCATE standards is evaluated externally every 5 years when we re-submit an extensive application for renewal of our national accreditation. Most recent reviews were conducted in 2006 and 2011 and both yielded full program approval by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) in conjunction with NCATE.

NASP organizes their program review according to 4 Standards. A table indicating how our program fulfills each section of NASP’s National Standard 1 (Program Context/Structure) can be found in this report (See Other Information, page 109). Feedback from NASP/NCATE indicated that we met each of the requirements for this important standard, as well as for Standard 2 which addresses 11 core training and practice domains, including: 1) data-based decision making, 2) consultation and collaboration, 3) instruction and development of cognitive/academic skills, 4) socialization and development of life skills, 5) student diversity, 6) school and systems organization, 7) prevention, crisis intervention, and mental health, 8) home, school, and community collaboration, 9) research and program evaluation, 10) school psychology practice and development, and 11) information technology. In addition we met all of the requirements for Standard 3 which addresses field experiences, including practica and internship. Finally, we met all of the requirements for Standard 4, Performance-based Program Assessment and Accountability.

Feedback obtained in August 2011 from NASP/NCATE on our assessment tools and results was overwhelmingly favorable, while some suggestions were made which our faculty will take under consideration. Those comments can be found in this report as well (See Other Information, page 108).

STUDENT ADVISEMENT STRATEGIES

Specialist students have no electives during their three-year MA/Educational Specialist Program. Therefore advisement about course selection is not required. Faculty advisors are available however to help students with their career planning or to address any faculty or student concerns that may come up. Each student is assigned to a faculty advisor upon admission to the program. Each student’s progress towards meeting the academic standards of the program is reviewed annually by the faculty as per Faculty Senate and NASP/NCATE requirements. Students in the school psychology program are required to maintain a 3.5 GPA in order to graduate. The outcome of these annual evaluations is shared with students, including meetings with individual students, as needed. In addition to graded coursework (which includes the assessment of knowledge, as well as specific performance-based skills in several courses that involve course-linked practicum experiences), students' progress is evaluated through a comprehensive exam and performance in three separate practica and an internship. Field-based school psychologists/supervisors play an active and critical role in the evaluation process. Our faculty-student ratio (also required by NASP/NCATE) is 10 students per each full-time faculty member. Given the small size of many of our seminar classes, students have easy access to all program faculty and often discuss advisement questions with our faculty interchangeably.

Student Assessment Process

At any decision point, a student may not be permitted to progress to the next level if satisfactory performance has not been demonstrated. The Field Experience Checklist and Evaluation Form which is completed by field-based supervisors, outlines procedures for evaluating progress in practicum and internship experiences.

http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/appendix-a.html

Throughout coursework and field experiences, students must adhere to the University's Code of Conduct, which is published in the Official Student Handbook. Additionally, students are expected to know the ethical standards of the National Association of School Psychologists and abide by them. Procedures for evaluating professional and ethical standards are directly linked to both the University's Code of Conduct and the ethical standards established by the National Association of School Psychologists.

As students progress through the program, their progress in assessment, counseling, and consultation is evaluated using specific rubrics which can be found on our website: http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/appendix-e.html. Note that similar evaluation tools are used throughout the program; however, students' performance is evaluated relative to their levels of training. That is, the performance considered "adequate" for each element is gradually increased over the course of the program. These rubrics are used, at a minimum, within one formal course or practicum, and the internship portfolio. Additional information about the performance-based assessments can be found in the Practicum Guidelines and Internship Guidelines on our website. Note also that the student gives feedback to the program regarding each semester's practicum placement using a Site Evaluation Form.

Interns at both the specialist and doctoral levels must satisfactorily complete internship portfolios consisting of a comprehensive psychological report, a comprehensive case study that links assessment to an effective intervention, demonstration (via tapes) of effective counseling and consultation skills, documentation of professional development activities, and a "special project" that demonstrates systems-level involvement in a prevention program, curriculum program, or program evaluation. Each portfolio item is evaluated by the university supervisor. Interns also are evaluated by their field supervisors using the Field Experience Checklist and Evaluation Form at the close of each semester of internship for the purpose of assessing skills in all domains of school psychology practice. Internship logs, submitted the first of every month, also are evaluated by the university-based supervisor and feedback on the logs is given to the intern.

Additionally, interns are required to achieve a passing score (165) on the National School Psychology Examination administered by the Educational Testing Service. The School Psychologist test, code 10400, is administered through the Praxis Series of Educational Testing Service. Information about the test and available test dates are available on the NASP web page and the Delaware Department of Education's web site.

Finally, each intern participates in an exit interview with one or more program faculty to evaluate progress, plan for ongoing professional development, and offer feedback on strengths/weaknesses of the program.

Assessment Process of Interpersonal and Professional Competencies

Because all candidates will be working and collaborating with students, families, teachers, and administrators, the program recognizes the importance of interpersonal and professional competencies, in addition to traditional academic skills. These competencies are carefully monitored by faculty and site supervisors through course work and practicum experiences and evaluations. At the conclusion of second practicum and of internship, students will be evaluated by their site supervisors according to the ‘Professional Dispositions of Effective Educators Form,’ which assesses the interpersonal and professional dispositions of students that are necessary to be effective in today’s schools. In accordance with the Professionalism Policy for Professional Education Programs at the University of Delaware, all students must review the new policy and complete the Signature of Professional Education Candidate form prior to participating in any field experience. More information can be found on the Office of Clinical Studies website at http://www.udel.edu/ocs/.

When problems are noted, one or more faculty members will meet with the student, inform him/her of the nature of the concerns, and assist the student in developing a remediation plan, if necessary. Interpersonal and professional difficulties subject to remediation plans may include (but are not limited to): accepting and utilizing feedback in supervision, developing and maintaining productive working relationships with faculty, peers, colleagues and clients, and behaving ethically and professionally (including all of the professional behaviors listed in the Field Experience Checklist) in practicum and classroom environments. In addition, personal or mental health problems that interfere with the quality of a student’s work may be subject to the provisions of this policy. Remediation plans may include (but are not limited to) additional practicum experiences, additional practicum supervision, personal therapy, and/or a leave of absence.

If the concern is not satisfactorily remediated as agreed upon by the student and faculty member(s), written notification will be mailed to the student with details of the reasons for possible dismissal from the program. The student will have two weeks to prepare a response to such notification and to ask for a formal review by the school psychology faculty. At such a review meeting, the faculty and student will both have the opportunity to present their perceptions of the situation. The faculty committee will then make a final determination regarding dismissal.

Procedures for Dismissal from the Program

If in the professional judgment of the school psychology faculty a student has failed to make satisfactory progress toward meeting the standards of the program, the faculty may vote to dismiss that student from the program. Rarely have students been dismissed. Dismissal may occur for the following reasons: (a) failure to maintain the required GPA (i.e., 3.5), (b) failure to complete practicum requirements, (c) ethical violations (e.g., plagiarism, cheating), (d) failure to pass the comprehensive exam in school psychology, and (e) serious deficiencies in interpersonal or professional competencies (as described above). When a student violates ethical standards or demonstrates deficiencies in interpersonal or professional competencies, the decision as to whether the student will be offered an opportunity to remediate deficiencies or will be immediately recommended for dismissal is solely at the discretion of the faculty.

In the case of dismissal, the program coordinator will send a report to the Office of Graduate Studies that states the faculty vote on the decision causing dismissal and the justification for this action. The Office of Graduate Studies will notify the student in writing when the student is being dismissed for failure to make satisfactory progress in the program.

Appeals

Students may appeal faculty decisions. Students should address requests for course waivers and appeals related to faculty interpretations of these guidelines to the School of Education Graduate Studies Committee. Appeals of grade and decisions to dismiss students from the program follow University procedures and are handled outside the School. For these decisions, students should follow the Academic Appeals process outlined in the University Catalog. Students should keep in mind that all the regulations and guidelines in the University Catalog apply to them over and beyond the requirements in this document.

PROGRAM ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS

In order to maintain full accreditation from the National Association of School Psychologists our program must conform to the NASP Standards for Graduate Preparation of School Psychologists. These can be viewed using the following link:

http://www.nasponline.org/standards/2010standards/1_Graduate_Preparation.pdf

Currently our program is aligned with the 2000 version of the standards; however, beginning January 1, 2015 our program will be required to demonstrate alignment with the 2010 revision of the Standards. The new Standards have been reorganized yet they are quite similar to the older version; therefore, our program should have no problem demonstrating this alignment. We will however consider necessary changes to the program beginning Spring 2012 such that any needed changes may be proposed during the Fall 2012 semester. This will allow us to have at least 3 years of data collection in line with the new Standards before our program is up for another national review.

ADMISSION CRITERIA AND DEGREE REQUIREMENTS

Approach new experiences with initiative, enthusiasm, flexibility, dedication, and willingness to learn
Engage in thoughtful analysis of performance, seek feedback, and incorporate suggestions into work
Are eager to learn, recognize that learning is never completed, and are committed to lifelong professional development
Have excellent critical thinking and writing skills
Enjoy working with children, parents, and educators
View all children, families, and educators as having strengths and a capacity to learn and change; embrace diversity as a source of enrichment rather than deficit; treat others with respect and a desire to understand their points of view
Are committed to ethical practices and to serving as agents of renewal and change within schools and communities
Value working collaboratively with students, families, educators, and the wider community in the pursuit of common goals
Understand that practice must be based in sound scholarship, viewing themselves as both producers and consumers of scholarly knowledge
Are committed to the profession of school psychology and seek to make contributions to the field.

Applicants are judged individually. However, the following are required and guide the admission process:

An undergraduate degree, preferably with a major in psychology or education, with at least three course in psychology (preferably in child development, educational psychology, statistics or abnormal psychology)
A minimum grade point average of at least 3.0 in all undergraduate and graduate course work. (Note, however, that during the past 5 years, nearly all admitted students had a GPA above 3.2 and the average was 3.5)
A grade point average of at least 3.0 in all graduate work completed

Submission of GRE verbal and quantitative scores. A total of 1000 is required. (Note that the scores of students admitted to the program during the past few years have averaged about 1150)
Submission of personal statement and goals (on application form)
Submission of three letters of recommendation
Evidence of proficiency in English. TOEFL scores are required for foreign students. A minimum score of 600 (paper-based test) or 250 (computer-based test) must be obtained.
Evidence of the dispositions cited above in the applicant's written statements and interview

Students' applications are reviewed by at least two faculty members. Approximately 15 of the most promising candidates are selected for personal interviews. Candidates' grades, test scores, letters of recommendation, and personal statements are reviewed for evidence of the qualities and predispostions listed above.

The interview process consists of three components. First, students participate in a small group orientation (usually about five students are included in a group). During this process, candidates introduce themselves to each other, listen to a presentation about the program from faculty, and ask questions about the program. Second, candidates participate in a series of 15-20 minute individual interviews with at least two faculty members. Third, candidates have the opportunity to talk with one or two current students in the program. The first two portions of the interview are evaluative; candidates' statements, questions, and interactional style are observed for evidence of the qualities and predispostions listed below. The third part of the interview is confidential. This conversation allows candidates to receive candid information about the program without concern for how their questions might be perceived by faculty.

Following the interviews, candidates are 1) offered admission, 2) placed on the waiting list, or 3) not accepted. Each year's entering class consists of 6-10 students. There is no provisional acceptance.

Please note that admission to the program is competitive. Those who meet stated requirements are not guaranteed admission, nor are those who fail to meet all of those requirements necessarily precluded from admission if they offer other appropriate strengths.

RECRUITING PROCEDURES

During campus interviews with our prospective candidates we usually ask students how they learned about our program. Most often it is from our website or word of mouth from a faculty member at their undergraduate institution, friend or relative. As a nationally accredited program we are listed on the National Association of School Psychologists website which includes a link to our website. This has proven to be a valuable recruitment tool as students seek accredited institutions within a specific region. Prior to 2008 we had a password protected handbook online. Since the handbook contains such rich information about the program which is useful to prospective students we removed the password and have made our handbook public. Since that time (and prior) we have received numerous compliments about how informative our website is compared to other institutions. Given the national and international reputations of our faculty members word of mouth has also proven to be a tremendous source of applicants to our program. We can count on colleagues from other institutions sending us a steady stream of their qualified undergraduates.

Beginning last fall (2010) the School of Education began a fall open house for prospective students with breakout sessions for each graduate program. We had a sizeable number of students attend and then follow-up with submitting their applications. Our graduate program staff (Gail Rys & Christina Johnston) also visit college fairs and court potential students for our program. Last year I believe they visited Penn State University, as well as an event geared towards recruiting from historically black colleges, among other venues.

STUDENT INFORMATION

APPLICATION AND ENROLLMENT HISTORY

Approximately 60-70 students apply for admission to the MA/Ed.S. Programs in School Psychology annually, competing for 8 positions. Acceptance rates vary across years ranging from 10-15%. Our matriculated students on average have GPA’s from their undergraduate institutions of 3.5 or above and average GRE scores of 1150-1200 (verbal and quantitative combined). Students are admitted into the M.A. program and after successful completion of their 30 credits in the M.A. program and a comprehensive exam, students are automatically matriculated into the Ed.S. Program. Below is a table containing information about the ethnic/racial status of our matriculated students as well as program completion rates. Since 2006, the first year that the Educational Specialist degree was awarded, we have graduated 45 students with more than a 95% completion rate. Overall, 20% of our graduates in the past 6 years were minorities and 87% were women.

Program: Specialist
Academic Year Admitted/Graduated	# of Candidates Admitted to the Program				# of Program Completers¹⁰
	Female Minority	Female Non-minority	Male Minority	Male Non-Minority
2009-2010/2012	1	6	0	1	8 (expected)
2008-2009/2011	0	7	0	0	7
2007-2008/2010	1	4	2	1	8
2006-2007/2009	1	8	0	0	9
2005-2006/2008	2	5	0	2	9
2004-2005/2007	1	6	0	0	7
2003-2004/2006	0	6	0	1	5

Note that these numbers include 2 Ph.D. students who also obtained the Ed.S. degree during the graduation year indicated. They may have been admitted into an earlier class since their program takes several years longer to complete.

PLACEMENT OF GRADUATES

In the past five years all of our graduates seeking employment upon graduation have been offered jobs within several months of graduation. Our 2010 graduates all had jobs by the second week in July and our recent 2011 cohort by September. While we assist students in any way that we can, such as calling upon colleagues and providing letters of reference, we do not place our graduates. We have information about the location of their jobs listed on our website.

http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/interns-and-grads.html

Our graduates are employed across the nation. Regionally they have positions in Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland, while they have gone as far as California, Michigan, Connecticut, and Arizona.

We are extremely proud of our graduates, many of whom have taken leadership positions in their schools and state associations. For example, one of our 2009 graduates, Cathy Holland, is the current President of the Delaware Association of School Psychologists.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS

Our students are highly sought after for graduate assistantships and in the past 8 years 100% of our specialists have been funded during their two years of didactic training prior to internship. This funding includes a 20 hour per week graduate assistantship for which students receive a stipend of approximately $16,000 per year along with tuition remission. Funding is not; however, guaranteed to Educational Specialist students. Our students obtain assistantships from funded faculty and center-based research, Student Life, the Education Resource Center, Disability Support Services, etc. Our minority students have been extremely successful in obtaining competitive University Graduate Scholarship Awards through the Office of Graduate and Professional Education at the University. All students matriculated who have applied have received this award supporting them for the two years during which they took coursework at UD prior to internship. In addition, students remaining in Delaware for their internship (year 3) have been able to obtain a stipend of $16,000 to $17,000 from collaborating school districts including Christina, Appoquinimink, Colonial, Smyrna, and Caesar Rodney.

FACTORS FOR ATTRACTING STUDENTS

Annual exit interviews with our graduating interns reveal that the most attractive features of our program include our small size, collegial students, program faculty, funding opportunities, and numerous field-experiences. All of our students report being extremely prepared for their internship year and first year as school psychologists. These are the features that we emphasize during campus interviews and in our online materials. For additional information about student funding, which is seen as an important factor in matriculation decisions by our top applicants, see section on Financial Support for Students (page 41). Greater elaboration on outstanding students, faculty and an innovative curriculum is provided in the section that follows on Program Uniqueness.

PROGRAM UNIQUENESS

The University of Delaware consistently ranks among the top 25 universities in the nation, offering exceptional library and technology resources as well as an attractive learning environment. UD’s School of Education is ranked 26th for best graduate programs in education in by US News and World Report. The Specialist Program in School Psychology at the University of Delaware is the only program to offer the Specialist Degree in the state of Delaware. There is no overlap in terms of degree granting with any other professional training programs at UD. A perusal of the National Association of School Psychologists website reveals that our program is among only a handful of nationally accredited programs in the region. Within this context we believe that our program is among the top school psychology programs in the nation -- a claim based on an established history of outstanding students, faculty and an innovative curriculum.

As previously stated, with an acceptance rate of 10-15%, our students on average have GPA’s from their undergraduate institutions of 3.5 or above and average GRE scores of 1150-1200 (verbal and quantitative combined). Our completion rate is high with more than 95% of students completing their degrees within 3 years. As stated previously, our students are highly sought after for graduate assistantships and in the past 8 years 100% of our specialists have been funded during their two years of didactic training prior to internship. Regarding our faculty, we have published in each of the major journals in school psychology, developmental psychology, educational psychology, and special education and have assumed leadership roles in school psychology at the national and state levels. For example, during the 2010-2011 school year, Kathy Minke served as President of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) and Marika Ginsburg-Block served as President of the Delaware Association of School Psychologists (DASP). George Bear has served on the NASP Program Approval Board Executive Committee for many years, and he is currently an Associate Editor of the School Psychology Review, the top journal in our field, among numerous other contributions. Finally, regarding our curriculum, it is sequenced such that didactic courses are paired strategically with field-based experiences beginning in the first year of the program. Unlike many other programs, students acquire approximately 1,800 hours of field experience through practicum and internship experiences in diverse settings. Also unique to our program, the faculty has worked to cultivate positive relationships with Delaware schools such that our students are paid a stipend for their work while on internship.

INTERDISCIPLINARY RELATIONSHIPS

Through coursework, field-based training experiences, and graduate assistantships our Educational Specialist students are able to interact with students and faculty in other programs and departments. Given that our graduate students do not take electives, they are unable to take courses outside of the program area. The Educational Specialist Program does contain several courses which are sometimes taken by students in other program areas of the School of Education, Human Development and Family Studies and areas outside of the College. These courses include EDUC 691: Applied Statistics and Research Design, EDUC 813: Child Psychopathology, and EDUC 651: School-Based Family Issues and Interventions. In addition, our students often use the University of Delaware’s Early Learning Center and the College School as resources for obtaining K-12 students for practice administering assessments, as well, as for additional field-based experiences. Finally, our students are employed across campus where they work with individuals in other related fields of education, including for example, disabilities and library science.

PROGRAM FACILITIES

The School Psychology Program is house within the Willard Hall Education Building. The program office is located in 210B WHL where student mailboxes are housed along with the graduate program assistant. In addition 220WHL is often used for class because it shares a one-way mirror with 210B, which can be used for our counseling and supervision classes. Other than faculty offices (all of which are located in WHL) and classroom space there are no other facility requirements specific to the program.

BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS

Three full-time faculty are assigned to the School Psychology Program area within the School of Education, Drs. Kathleen Minke, Dr. George Bear and Dr. Marika Ginsburg-Block. Aside from the 6 core courses taught by these faculty members, the remaining 4 Educational Specialist classes are taught by affiliated faculty and adjunct instructors, several of whom are graduates of the program. Other than faculty and instructor salaries, there are no other recurring expenses specific to the school psychology program, which actually has no budget. The School of Education has consistently budgeted funds to support several student and supervisor activities, including an annual luncheon in May for field-based supervisors who receive no honorarium for their supervision services. This budgetary allocation is at the discretion of the School of Education Director.

Name of Assessment[1]	Type or Form of Assessment[2]	When the Assessment Is Administered[3]
1	[Licensure assessment, or other content-based assessment (required)] [4] This must be a state or national school psychology credentialing exam. If your state does not require a school psychology credentialing exam, then the Praxis II in School Psychology must be required.	PRAXIS II – National Exam in School Psychology	Spring of internship (third) year
2	[Assessment of content (required)] Program or course-embedded assessment of candidate knowledge. This might consist of a comprehensive examination, an oral or qualifying exam, an exam embedded in one or more courses that all candidates complete, and/or grades for courses in which NASP Standards 2.1-2.11 are addressed. Programs may use a combination of program or course-embedded content assessment methods.	Course grades	Every semester
3	[Assessment of candidate ability to plan (required)] Assessment in practica that demonstrates candidates can effectively plan the professional responsibilities required of a school psychologist.	Practicum ratings by field supervisors	End of second, third, and fourth semesters
4	[Assessment of clinical practice (required)] INTERN EVALUATIONS BY FIELD SUPERVISORS. Assessment that demonstrates candidates' knowledge, skills, and professional work characteristics/dispositions are applied effectively in practice during internship	Internship ratings by field supervisors	Twice during third year (End of fall and spring semesters)
5	[Assessment of candidate effect on student learning (required)] Comprehensive, Performance-Based Assessment Of Candidate Abilities Evaluated By Faculty During Internship.	Portfolio in Internship, consisting of psychological report linking assessment to intervention, counseling tape, consultation tape, system-level “special project, and comprehensive case study	Items submitted at various points during internship, but prior to completion of internship.
6	[Additional assessment (required)] Assessment that demonstrates that candidates are able to integrate domains of knowledge and apply professional skills in delivering a comprehensive range of services evidenced by measurable positive impact on children, youth, families, and other consumers. NOTE: You need not have a separate assessment of this area if it is addressed by assessment 5. Simply refer to the particular assessment(s) and aggregate the relevant data (e.g., particular items or sections of an assessment)	Comprehensive case study (included in Assessment #5)	Spring of Internship
7	*Additional assessment that addresses NASP standards (optional)]*	Alumni Survey	Spring, every other year
8	*Additional assessment that addresses NASP standards (optional)* ]**

ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

Program Handbook, Appendix A, pp 41-54

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SCORING RUBRIC WAS RECENTLY REVISED (FALL, 2010). INSTEAD OF THE 4-POINT SCALE THAT APPEARS IN THE HANDBOOK, THE FOLLOWING 3-POINT SCALE WAS USED FOR THE DATA PRESENTED BELOW

0    = Not appropriate for this placement.

1 = Unsatisfactory. (The student needs much more practice and supervision than the majority of other students at the same level of training).

2    = Satisfactory. (The student demonstrates skills consistent with current level of training. It is understood continued practice and supervision are recommended).

3 = Competent. (The student demonstrates mastery of this skill, requiring little, or no, additional supervision).

First Practicum

Second Practicum

Third Practicum

Domain 2.1: Data-Based Decision-Making

Class of 2010

N=7

(Spring 2008)

Class of 2011

N=2 (Spring 2009)

Class of 2012

N=6

(Spring 2010)

Mean

Class of 2009

N=8

(Fall 2007)

Class of 2010

N=8

(Fall 2008)

Class of 2011

N=9

(Fall 2009)

Mean

Class of 2008

N=8 (Spring 2007)

Class of 2009

N=8

(Spring 2008)

Class of 2010

N=8

(Spring 2009)

Mean

B1- Reviews student records and obtains background information on the student's developmental and educational history. Accurately summarizes the information, including results of previous evaluations, where appropriate.

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.88

3.00

2.92

B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.71

2.67

2.75

2.71

2.75

2.88

2.83

2.82

2.88

3.00

2.92

B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.50

2.62

2.63

2.50

2.83

2.65

2.88

3.00

2.92

B4- Interviews the student and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.63

2.66

2.63

2.50

2.78

2.64

2.88

3.00

2.92

B5- Observes the student and the classroom environment and gathers information that addresses the referral question. Employs methods of recording that are appropriate for the targeted behavior (e.g., narrative, interval, frequency, duration, momentary time sampling).

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.69

2.63

2.78

2.70

2.88

3.00

2.92

B6- Where appropriate, conducts functional behavioral assessments, as required in IDEA.

2.50

2.33

2.44

2.00

2.50

2.17

2.67

2.70

2.83

2.73

B7- Selects and uses a variety of assessment methods that address the referral question, are psychometrically sound, and provide an accurate and useful profile of the student's strengths and weaknesses.

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.63

2.88

2.83

2.78

2.75

2.00

3.00

2.58

B8- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of intellectual ability.

2.71

2.89

2.81

2.80

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.63

2.88

3.00

2.84

B9- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of academic achievement.

2.71

2.89

2.69

2.73

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B10- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized measures of social and emotional functioning and adaptive behavior.

2.71

2.89

2.69

2.76

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B11- Conducts curriculum-based assessments in specific areas of achievement to obtain practical, authentic information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.79

2.71

2.63

2.80

2.81

2.75

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B12- Scores all tests with accuracy

2.71

2.88

2.64

2.74

2.88

2.88

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

C1- Written report presents data clearly and accurately.

2.43

2.72

2.79

2.65

2.63

2.94

2.78

2.78

2.63

3.00

2.88

C2- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of intellectual ability.

2.57

2.89

2.71

2.72

2.50

2.88

2.78

2.72

2.88

3.00

2.96

C3- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of academic achievement.

2.43

2.83

2.71

2.66

2.50

2.94

2.89

2.78

2.88

3.00

2.96

C4- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of social, emotional, and adaptive functioning.

2.43

2.33

2.71

2.49

2.56

2.69

2.78

2.68

2.75

3.00

2.92

C5- Written report integrates data across multiple methods and sources.

2.57

2.33

2.57

2.49

2.50

2.94

2.89

2.78

2.86

3.00

2.95

C6- Written report addresses a referral question.

2.57

2.88

2.71

2.72

2.63

2.88

2.89

2.80

2.88

3.00

2.96

C7- Written report offers a variety of practical interventions that address the referral question and assessment results.

2.57

2.83

2.57

2.66

2.56

2.88

2.89

2.78

2.88

3.00

2.96

C8- Completes report in a timely manner.

2.29

2.67

2.57

2.51

2.75

2.80

3.00

2.85

2.86

3.00

2.95

C9- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, data are presented clearly and accurately.

2.57

2.67

2.50

2.58

2.50

2.56

2.88

2.65

2.71

3.00

2.90

C10- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, a variety of practical interventions are discussed in a collaborative, problem solving manner.

2.60

2.67

2.43

2.57

2.38

2.25

2.62

2.42

2.57

3.00

2.83

2.80

C11- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others the referral question is well addressed.

2.50

2.78

2.50

2.59

2.71

2.50

2.88

2.70

2.86

3.00

2.95

Domain 2.2: Consultation and Collaboration

B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.71

2.67

2.75

2.71

2.75

2.88

2.83

2.82

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.50

2.62

2.63

2.50

2.83

2.69

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

C10- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, a variety of practical interventions are discussed in a collaborative, problem solving manner.

2.60

2.67

2.43

2.57

2.38

2.25

2.62

2.50

2.57

3.00

2.83

2.80

D5- Collaborates effectively with others throughout the assessment to intervention process.*

2.75

2.00

2.63

2.46

2.83

2.67

2.75

2.60

2.88

3.00

2.96

D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.*

3.00

2.33

2.00

2.44

2.67

2.60

2.75

2.73

2.83

2.75

3.00

2.86

D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.*

2.39

2.33

2.00

2.24

3.00

2.33

2.60

2.64

2.75

2.86

3.00

2.87

D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams. *

2.50

3.00

2.50

2.67

2.00

2.60

2.30

3.00

2.83

3.00

2.94

F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.

2.71

3.00

2.94

2.88

2.88

2.96

3.00

2.95

2.88

3.00

2.96

Domain 2.3: Effective Instruction

A6- Reviews the school's curricula, including the scope and sequence of the reading curriculum in the elementary school.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.69

2.63

2.78

2.70

2.88

3.00

2.92

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.63

2.88

2.83

2.78

2.75

2.00

3.00

2.58

B8- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of intellectual ability.

2.71

2.89

2.81

2.80

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.63

2.88

3.00

2.84

B9- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of academic achievement.

2.71

2.89

2.69

2.73

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B11- Conducts curriculum-based assessments in specific areas of achievement to obtain practical, authentic information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.79

2.71

2.63

2.80

2.81

2.75

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

Domain 2.4: Socialization and Development of Life Skills

B6- Where appropriate, conducts functional behavioral assessments, as required in IDEA.

2.50

1.88

2.33

2.24

2.00

2.50

2.17

2.67

2.70

2.83

2.73

2.57

2.67

2.63

2.62

2.63

2.88

2.83

2.78

2.75

2.00

3.00

2.58

B10- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized measures of social and emotional functioning and adaptive behavior.

2.71

2.89

2.69

2.73

2.75

2.88

2.89

2.84

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

D8- Direct Interventions: Individual Counseling*

2.00

2.00

2.56

2.50

2.71

2.59

2.86

2.75

3.00

2.87

D9- Direct Interventions: Group Counseling*

3.00

3.00

2.62

2.25

3.00

2.62

D11- Direct Interventions: Social skills and social problem solving training.*

3.00

2.00

2.33

2.75

2.33

2.75

2.61

2.67

2.75

2.72

D12- Direct Interventions: Other.

2.00

2.33

2.00

2.11

2.60

2.50

2.55

2.88

2.75

3.00

2.88

D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.*

3.00

2.33

2.00

2.44

2.67

2.60

2.80

2.69

2.83

2.75

3.00

2.86

D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.*

2.30

2.33

2.50

2.24

3.00

2.33

2.75

2.69

2.75

2.86

3.00

2.87

D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams. *

2.50

3.00

2.60

2.67

2.00

2.60

2.30

3.00

2.83

3.00

2.94

Domain 2.5: Student Diversity

A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.

1.86

2.00

1.95

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A13- Drawing from the above sources, and other sources, demonstrates an understanding and appreciation of human diversity, including knowledge of the importance of differences in families, cultures, and the individual backgrounds and learning characteristics of children.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

F9- Demonstrates awareness and responsiveness to human and cultural diversity.

2.86

3.00

2.00

2.62

2.88

3.00

2.96

3.00

2.88

3.00

2.96

Domain 2.6: School and Systems Organization

A1- Reviews with supervisor the organization and administration of general education and special education services in the assigned school(s) and district.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A3- Learns roles and responsibilities of school personnel, including the school psychologist, school counselor, speech clinician, reading specialist, special education teacher, general education teacher, and administrators.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A4- Reviews the philosophy and goals of the school and district.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A5- Reviews the disciplinary policies, prevention programs, and crisis response plans of the school and district.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A6- Reviews the school's curricula, including the scope and sequence of the reading curriculum in the elementary school.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A7- Demonstrates understanding of, and adherence to, the district's special education regulations, guidelines, and procedures.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A8- Reviews IEP requirements and forms and observes an IEP meeting that includes the child's parent.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A9- Observes child study team (i.e., intervention assistance team, START team, etc.) and reviews its responsibilities, policies, and procedures.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A10- Observes school psychologist performing various services, including assessment linked to direct and indirect intervention.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A12- Drawing from the above sources, and other sources, demonstrates an understanding and appreciation of a systems perspective toward schooling.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

Domain 2.7: Prevention, Crisis Intervention, and Mental Health

A5- Reviews the disciplinary policies, prevention programs, and crisis response plans of the school and district.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

D8- Direct Interventions: Individual Counseling*

2.00

2.00

2.56

2.50

2.71

2.59

2.86

2.75

3.00

2.87

D9- Direct Interventions: Group Counseling*

3.00

3.00

2.62

2.25

3.00

2.63

D11- Direct Interventions: Social skills and social problem solving training.*

3.00

2.00

2.33

2.75

2.33

2.75

2.61

2.67

2.75

2.72

D12- Direct Interventions: Other.

2.00

2.33

2.00

2.11

2.60

2.50

2.55

2.88

2.75

3.00

2.88

D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.*

3.00

2.33

2.00

2.44

2.67

2.60

2.80

2.67

2.83

2.75

3.00

2.86

D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.*

2.30

2.33

2.00

2.21

3.00

2.33

2.75

2.69

2.75

2.86

3.00

2.87

D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams. *

2.50

3.00

2.50

2.67

2.00

2.60

2.30

3.00

2.83

3.00

2.94

Domain 2.8: Home/School/community Collaboration

A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.71

2.67

2.75

2.71

2.75

2.88

2.83

2.82

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.

2.57

2.78

2.50

2.62

2.63

2.88

2.83

2.78

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

D5- Collaborates effectively with others throughout the assessment to intervention process.*

2.75

2.00

2.63

2.46

2.83

2.67

2.75

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.96

D7- Makes every effort to involve families in interventions.*

2.00

2.33

2.11

2.60

2.57

2.60

2.59

2.71

2.88

3.00

2.86

F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.*

2.71

3.00

2.94

2.88

2.88

2.96

3.00

2.95

2.88

3.00

2.96

Domain 2.9: Research and Program Evaluation

D3- Selects or develops interventions that are supported by theory and/or research.*

2.00

2.50

2.17

2.60

2.67

2.75

2.67

2.75

2.88

3.00

2.88

D6- Collects and analyzes data to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions.*

3.00

2.00

2.33

2.67

2.00

2.67

2.45

2.86

2.88

3.00

2.88

Domain 2.10: School Psychology Practice and Development

A1- Reviews with supervisor the organization and administration of general education and special education services in the assigned school(s) and district.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A7- Demonstrates understanding of, and adherence to, the district's special education regulations, guidelines, and procedures.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A10- Observes school psychologist performing various services, including assessment linked to direct and indirect intervention.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

2.00

F1- Reliable, responsible, and dependable

2.86

3.00

2.88

2.91

3.00

3.00

2.88

3.00

2.96

F2- Performs functions with confidence and appropriate assertiveness

2.86

3.00

2.75

2.87

3.00

2.96

3.00

2.98

2.88

3.00

2.92

F3- Assumes initiative (e.g., doesn't wait to be told what needs to be done).

2.86

2.89

3.00

2.92

3.00

3.00

3.00

2.88

3.00

2.96

F4- Is prepared for supervision.

2.86

3.00

2.95

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

F5- Accepts and makes effective use of feedback from supervisor.

2.86

3.00

2.95

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

F6- Establishes and maintains positive and appropriate relations with children.

2.86

3.00

2.95

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

F7- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with teachers and school staff.

2.86

3.00

2.88

2.91

3.00

2.96

3.00

2.98

3.00

3.00

F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.

2.71

3.00

2.94

2.88

3.00

2.96

3.00

2.98

2.88

3.00

2.96

F9- Demonstrates awareness and responsiveness to human and cultural diversity.

2.86

3.00

2.95

3.00

3.00

3.00

2.88

3.00

2.96

F10- Consistently demonstrates sensitivity and interpersonal skills necessary to work with student, parents, teachers, and others of diverse characteristics.

2.86

3.00

2.95

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

F11- Understands and adheres to professional, ethical, and legal standards in school psychology and education.

2.86

3.00

2.94

2.93

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

Domain 2.11: Information Technology

E1- Word processing

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

E2- E-mail

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

E3- Test scoring and interpretation

2.71

2.89

3.00

2.85

2.87

2.88

2.88

2.75

3.00

2.92

E4- Information retrieval via various websites

2.50

2.89

2.93

2.77

2.77

2.88

2.83

2.88

3.00

2.96

E5- Power Point and visual presentations of data*

3.00

3.00

3.00

2.80

3.00

2.93

E6- Other

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

*Note: Some items, especially in the first practicum and skills expected in the internship but not beforehand, are not evaluated every semester because skills assessed by these items are not expected or practiced at that time. Thus, there are missing data in the table. Likewise, we excluded items that are specific to the internship.

Assessment 4 Data: Intern Evaluation

NARRATIVE

Brief Description

The Field Experience Checklist is used to develop candidate goals for internship experiences against which they are evaluated at the end of each semester by their site supervisors.

Items of the Field Experience Checklist items appear in the table below and the actual checklist appears in the online Handbook.

Instead of a separate checklist for practica and internship (consisting of fewer items), we use one comprehensive checklist for both practica and internship. This allows us to monitor progression in skills throughout the program. However, not all items apply to each practica (e.g., it is not expected that ratings will be given on many items during the first practicum), and it is expected that higher ratings will be obtained as candidates progress through their training. Likewise, some items apply to interns, but not practicum students.

Also, please note that although data are required for only two cohorts, we report it for three because we first began writing this report we understood 3 years of data were required (which was true last year). Rather than revising sections where we report 3 years of data, we decided to keep it, thinking that this would easier for us and no hardship to reviewers.

Alignment with Standards

Evaluation items are aligned with the NASP domains in the table below, which also includes the aggregated data.

Brief Analysis of Data

Aggregated Assessment 4 data for the past three years across all items on the Field Experience Checklist are reported in the table below.

In addition to high mean ratings on these items (as seen in the attachments), results of ratings across all items show that 100% of interns completed the tasks adequately (Section A items), receiving either a “Satisfactory” or “Competent” rating where skills were assessed. (Thus, we see no need to report scores for individuals or a score other than the mean.)

Note that for items in Section “A” (items that are not skill-based), a two-point score was used, with 2 denoting that the activity was completed adequately and 1 denoting inadequate completion. For all other sections (B-G) 1 = Unsatisfactory, 2= Satisfactory, and 3 = Competent.

Brief Interpretation as Evidence of Meeting Standards

Our candidates either maintained a uniformly high level of performance or showed improvement from fall to spring evaluations during their internship year across all domains of performance (as delineated in the table). All average spring ratings for were at or very close to the top of the rating scale and all candidates received ratings of competence in each domain. Overall, these data show that upon completing 3 practica (totaling over 450 clock hours) our candidates entered their internship year with solid skills which were maintained or enhanced during the year demonstrating proficiency across all domains at the conclusion of their internship year.

ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

See Program Handbook for Field Experience Checklist: Planning and Evaluation Form for Practica and Internship (including scoring guide). http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/appendix-a.html

Requirements on the use this instrument can be found in the online Program Handbook under Internship Guidelines.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SCORING RUBRIC WAS RECENTLY REVISED (FALL, 2010). INSTEAD OF THE 4-POINT SCALE THAT APPEARS IN THE HANDBOOK, THE FOLLOWING 3-POINT SCALE WAS USED FOR THE DATA PRESENTED BELOW

0    = Not appropriate for this placement.
1 = Unsatisfactory. (The student needs much more practice and supervision than the majority of other students at the same level of training).
2    = Satisfactory. (The student demonstrates skills consistent with current level of training. It is understood continued practice and supervision are recommended).
3 = Competent. (The student demonstrates mastery of this skill, requiring little, or no, additional supervision).

AGGREGATED FIELD SUPERVISORS’ RATINGS FOR INTERNSHIP
	Fall				Spring
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.1: Data-Based Decision-Making
B1- Reviews student records and obtains background information on the student's developmental and educational history. Accurately summarizes the information, including results of previous evaluations, where appropriate.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B4- Interviews the student and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B5- Observes the student and the classroom environment and gathers information that addresses the referral question. Employs methods of recording that are appropriate for the targeted behavior (e.g., narrative, interval, frequency, duration, momentary time sampling).	2.83	3.00	2.75	2.86	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B6- Where appropriate, conducts functional behavioral assessments, as required in IDEA.	2.25	2.60	2.50	2.45	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
B7- Selects and uses a variety of assessment methods that address the referral question, are psychometrically sound, and provide an accurate and useful profile of the student's strengths and weaknesses.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B8- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of intellectual ability.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
B9- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of academic achievement.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
B10- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized measures of social and emotional functioning and adaptive behavior.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
B11- Conducts curriculum-based assessments in specific areas of achievement to obtain practical, authentic information that addresses the referral question.	2.75	3.00	3.00	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B12- Scores all tests with accuracy	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.83	2.92	2.92
C1- Written report presents data clearly and accurately.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C2- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of intellectual ability.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C3- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of academic achievement.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C4- Written report presents a clear, accurate, and useful interpretation of results of the assessment of social, emotional, and adaptive functioning.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
C5- Written report integrates data across multiple methods and sources.	2.89	3.00	2.50	2.80	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C6- Written report addresses a referral question.	3.00	3.00	2.88	2.96	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C7- Written report offers a variety of practical interventions that address the referral question and assessment results.	2.78	3.00	3.00	2.93	2.90	2.83	3.00	2.94
C8- Completes report in a timely manner.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
C9- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, data are presented clearly and accurately.	2.89	3.00	2.75	2.88	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
C10- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, a variety of practical interventions are discussed in a collaborative, problem solving manner.	2.78	3.00	3.00	2.93	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
C11- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others the referral question is well addressed.	2.88	3.00	2.75	2.88	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.2: Consultation and Collaboration
B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
C10- In oral reports to teachers, parents, and others, a variety of practical interventions are discussed in a collaborative, problem solving manner.	2.78	3.00	3.00	2.93	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
D5- Collaborates effectively with others throughout the assessment to intervention process.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	2.90	3.00	3.00	2.97
D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D16- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with others (other than those listed above).	2.80	3.00	3.00	2.93	3.00	3.00		3.00
F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
G1- Works collaboratively with others at the systems-level in developing and implementing prevention and intervention programs that promote learning environments that are positive, safe, and facilitate the emotional, social, and academic development of all children.	2.81	2.83	2.75	2.80	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.3: Effective Instruction
A6- Reviews the school's curricula, including the scope and sequence of the reading curriculum in the elementary school.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
B5- Observes the student and the classroom environment and gathers information that addresses the referral question. Employs methods of recording that are appropriate for the targeted behavior (e.g., narrative, interval, frequency, duration, momentary time sampling).	2.83	3.00	2.75	2.86	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B7- Selects and uses a variety of assessment methods that address the referral question, are psychometrically sound, and provide an accurate and useful profile of the student's strengths and weaknesses.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B8- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of intellectual ability.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
B9- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized tests of academic achievement.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94
B11- Conducts curriculum-based assessments in specific areas of achievement to obtain practical, authentic information that addresses the referral question.	2.75	3.00	3.00	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.4: Socialization and Development of Life Skills
B6- Where appropriate, conducts functional behavioral assessments, as required in IDEA.	2.25	2.60	2.50	2.45	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
B7- Selects and uses a variety of assessment methods that address the referral question, are psychometrically sound, and provide an accurate and useful profile of the student's strengths and weaknesses.	3.00	3.00	2.75	2.92	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B10- Adheres to standardized directions and procedures when administering standardized measures of social and emotional functioning and adaptive behavior.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D8- Direct Interventions: Individual Counseling	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D9- Direct Interventions: Group Counseling	2.75	3.00	3.00	2.92	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D10- Direct Interventions: Applied behavior analysis and intervention.	2.60	3.00	3.00	2.87	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D11- Direct Interventions: Social skills and social problem solving training.	2.69	3.00	3.00	2.90	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
D12- Direct Interventions: Other.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	2.90	3.00	3.00	2.97
D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D16- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with others (other than those listed above).	2.80	3.00	3.00	2.93	3.00	3.00		3.00
D17- Indirect Interventions: In-service presentations to teachers, parents, and/or others.		2.67	3.00	2.84		3.00		3.00
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.5: Student Diversity
A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A13- Drawing from the above sources, and other sources, demonstrates an understanding and appreciation of human diversity, including knowledge of the importance of differences in families, cultures, and the individual backgrounds and learning characteristics of children.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
F9- Demonstrates awareness and responsiveness to human and cultural diversity.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80		2.90
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.6: School and Systems Organization
A1- Reviews with supervisor the organization and administration of general education and special education services in the assigned school(s) and district.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A3- Learns roles and responsibilities of school personnel, including the school psychologist, school counselor, speech clinician, reading specialist, special education teacher, general education teacher, and administrators.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A4- Reviews the philosophy and goals of the school and district.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A5- Reviews the disciplinary policies, prevention programs, and crisis response plans of the school and district.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A6- Reviews the school's curricula, including the scope and sequence of the reading curriculum in the elementary school.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A7- Demonstrates understanding of, and adherence to, the district's special education regulations, guidelines, and procedures.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A8- Reviews IEP requirements and forms and observes an IEP meeting that includes the child's parent.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A9- Observes child study team (i.e., intervention assistance team, START team, etc.) and reviews its responsibilities, policies, and procedures.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A10- Observes school psychologist performing various services, including assessment linked to direct and indirect intervention.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A12- Drawing from the above sources, and other sources, demonstrates an understanding and appreciation of a systems perspective toward schooling.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.7: Prevention, Crisis Intervention, and Mental Health
A5- Reviews the disciplinary policies, prevention programs, and crisis response plans of the school and district.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
D8- Direct Interventions: Individual Counseling	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D9- Direct Interventions: Group Counseling	2.75	3.00	3.00	2.92	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D10- Direct Interventions: Applied behavior analysis and intervention.	2.60	3.00	3.00	2.87	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D11- Direct Interventions: Social skills and social problem solving training.	2.69	3.00	3.00	2.90	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
D12- Direct Interventions: Other.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D13- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with individual teacher/support staff.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	2.90	3.00	3.00	2.97
D14- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with parents.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D15- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with pre-referral or intervention assistance teams.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D16- Indirect Interventions: Collaborative consultation with others (other than those listed above).	2.80	3.00	3.00	2.93	3.00	3.00		3.00
D17- Indirect Interventions: In-service presentations to teachers, parents, and/or others.		2.67	3.00	2.84		3.00		3.00
G1- Works collaboratively with others at the systems-level in developing and implementing prevention and intervention programs that promote learning environments that are positive, safe, and facilitate the emotional, social, and academic development of all children.	2.81	2.83	2.75	2.80	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.8: Home/School/community Collaboration
A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
B2- Interviews teachers and support staff and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
B3- Interviews parents (personally, or by phone if necessary) and gathers information that addresses the referral question.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
D5- Collaborates effectively with others throughout the assessment to intervention process.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D7- Makes every effort to involve families in interventions.	2.72	3.00	3.00	2.91	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.9: Research and Program Evaluation
D3- Selects or develops interventions that are supported by theory and/or research.	2.83	3.00	3.00	2.94	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
D6- Collects and analyzes data to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions.	2.71	3.00	3.00	2.90	3.00	3.00	2.83	2.94
G2- Engages in research and program evaluation.	2.67	3.00	3.00	2.89	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
G3- Stays abreast of current research and translates it into practice.	2.83	3.00	3.00	2.94	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
G4- Evaluates the effectiveness of interventions and consultation.	2.69	2.83	3.00	2.84	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00

Domain 2.10: School Psychology Practice and Development
A1- Reviews with supervisor the organization and administration of general education and special education services in the assigned school(s) and district.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A2- Reviews with supervisor the various school-based and community programs and services for children with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A3- Learns roles and responsibilities of school personnel, including the school psychologist, school counselor, speech clinician, reading specialist, special education teacher, general education teacher, and administrators.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A7- Demonstrates understanding of, and adherence to, the district's special education regulations, guidelines, and procedures.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A10- Observes school psychologist performing various services, including assessment linked to direct and indirect intervention.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
A11- Observes and interviews staff of various school-based programs that serve students with diverse needs.*	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00	2.00
F1- Reliable, responsible, and dependable	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
F2- Performs functions with confidence and appropriate assertiveness	2.83	3.00	2.75	2.86	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
F3- Assumes initiative (e.g., doesn't wait to be told what needs to be done).	2.89	3.00	2.75	2.86	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F4- Is prepared for supervision.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F5- Accepts and makes effective use of feedback from supervisor.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F6- Establishes and maintains positive and appropriate relations with children.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F7- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with teachers and school staff.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F8- Establishes and maintains positive and collaborative relations with parents, families, and members of the community.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F9- Demonstrates awareness and responsiveness to human and cultural diversity.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F10- Consistently demonstrates sensitivity and interpersonal skills necessary to work with student, parents, teachers, and others of diverse characteristics.	2.89	3.00	3.00	2.96	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
F11- Understands and adheres to professional, ethical, and legal standards in school psychology and education.	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
G5- Demonstrates commitment to continuous learning and professional development activities.	2.94	3.00	3.00	2.98	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
	Class of 2008 Fall 2007 N= 9	Class of 2009 Fall 2008 N=6	Class of 2010 Fall 2009 N=4	Mean	Class of 2008 Spring 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 Spring 2009 N=6	Class of 2010 Spring 2010 N=7	Mean
Domain 2.11: Information Technology
E1- Word processing	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
E2- E-mail	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
E3- Test scoring and interpretation	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
E4- Information retrieval via various websites	3.00	2.83	3.00	2.94	3.00	2.80	3.00	2.93
E5- Power Point and visual presentations of data	2.67	3.00	2.50	2.72	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
E6- Computer-assisted instruction and technology for children with disabilites	2.71	2.50	2.67	2.63	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
G1- Works collaboratively with others at the systems-level in developing and implementing prevention and intervention programs that promote learning environments that are positive, safe, and facilitate the emotional, social, and academic development of all children.	2.81	2.83	2.75	2.80	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00

*These items are rated on a 3 point scale (0-2). A score of 2 reflects the highest possible rating. All other items are rated on a 4 point scale (0-3) where a score of 3 indicates the highest rating.

Assessment 5 Data: Performance Based

NARRATIVE

Brief Description

As described in the Internship Guidelines in the online Program Handbook, and in the course syllabus for the internship, all interns are required to develop a portfolio. Included among the items are the following. These items are scored by two faculty members, using rubrics presented in Appendix E of the Handbook.

http://www.udel.edu/education/masters/psychology/handbook/appendix-e.html

Competencies in Psychological Report Writing. In addition to submitting a minimum of 4 full psychological reports to the course instructor and field supervisors in each of the 3 practica, candidates must submit a complete psychological report during the internship. The report must reflect competencies in report writing but more importantly in problem-solving assessment linked to recommended interventions.

Competencies in Counseling. In addition to submitting a series of videotapes in the two counseling courses (EDUC 663 and EDUC 831), candidates must submit a video during their internship that demonstrates competencies in counseling.

Competencies in Consultation. In addition to submitting a consultation tape in each of the two consultation courses (EDUC 830 & 841), candidates must submit a video during their internship that demonstrates competencies in problem solving consultation.

Systems Special Project. This project focuses on an issue at the school or district level, and is to reflect the candidate’s contributions to prevention or intervention programs concerning social, emotional, or academic development. The project may involve development/modification of school policies, needs assessment, program design, program implementation, and/or program evaluation. The projects are presented in a “poster session” at the spring luncheon meeting for supervisors and students (during the past two years they also have been presented at the spring conference of the Delaware Association of School Psychologists).

Comprehensive Case Study. In the spring semester of their internship, candidates must submit a complete case study linking problem solving assessment and intervention to positive outcomes. In this project they must demonstrate their knowledge and professional expertise to collaborate with teachers, families and other professionals in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions that effectively respond to the educational and mental health needs of children and youth. Data demonstrating positive outcomes must be included.

Alignment with Standards

As can be seen in the project requirements and scoring rubrics, one or more of these 5 portfolio requirements correspond with the following NASP domains:

Domain 2.1. Candidates collect and interpret data and translate assessment results into empirically-based decisions. This is the primary focus of the psychological assessment report project and the comprehensive case study, but also applies to the counseling and consultation projects.

Domain 2.2. Consultation and collaboration is the primary focus of the consultation project, but also generally subsumed within the other four projects.

Domains 2.3 & 2.4. Depending on the nature of the case chosen for their comprehensive case study and for their psychological report, candidates develop appropriate cognitive and academic goals and interventions and/or appropriate behavioral, affective, adaptive, and social goals and interventions for students. The counseling case clearly reflects the application of domain 2.4.

Domain 2.5. All interns are placed in public schools with great racial, cultural, and socioeconomic diversity and with a wide range of children with disabilities. In order to be effective, projects require knowledge of individual differences and sensitivity and responsiveness to the needs of individuals of diverse characteristics

Domain 2.6. This is the primary focus of the system-wide “special project” in which candidates must address a system-wide issue of concern to their individual school or district. This requires a clear understanding of school policies and practices (and often the development or modification thereof) and the ability to work collaboratively with others to create and maintain safe, supportive, and effective learning environments.

Domain 2.7. All of the above portfolio items address prevention, intervention, and/or mental health, but two do so most directly: the comprehensive case study does so at the individual child level and most of the special projects do so at the systems level.

Domain 2.8. The portfolio requirements do not address this domain directly (as done elsewhere in the program, such as in requirements for EDUC 651, Diversity and Family School Collaboration). However, many of the consultation cases, counseling cases, comprehensive case studies, and special projects clearly address competencies in this domain. It would be extremely rare for this domain not to be addressed by a candidate in one or more of the portfolio requirements.

Domain 2.9. As reflected in the scoring rubric, the systems “special project” emphasizes research and program evaluation (see Attachment I C, Program Handbook, Appendix E, Scoring Rubric for Special Project).

Domain 2.10. Each portfolio item requires the application of ethical, professional, and legal standards. This is not always addressed on scoring rubrics for a specific portfolio item because it is understood that these competencies are evaluated throughout the internship by site and university supervisors (using the Field Experience Checklist and Evaluation Form).

Domain 2.11. Interns must access, evaluate, and utilize information sources and technology for each of the portfolio items (e.g., in scoring tests, finds research and recommendations), but competencies in this domain are most directly included in requirements of the systems special project (in which interns must use computer technology for data management, retrieve information resources, and to present their findings). Each special project is presented as a PowerPoint.

For the assessment, counseling, and consultation portfolio items, the same scoring rubrics are used as used in courses in which these skills are taught, but skills are evaluated relative to the candidate’s level of training. That is, the performance considered “adequate” for each element is gradually increased over the course of the program, with demonstration of actual competencies required during the internship. As noted on page 9 of the syllabus for EDUC 688, all candidates “must demonstrate at least “satisfactory” on ALL skills on the Field Experience Checklist and a score of “3” (competent) on over 90% the items.”

The rubrics for the comprehensive case study and special project are used only in the internship.

The comprehensive case study rubric is based on that used by the National School Psychology Certification System for the purposes of awarding the NCSP.

Brief Analysis of Data

Assessment 5 data report aggregated data for 5 portfolio items: assessment, counseling, consultation, comprehensive case study, and special project. For each portfolio item, mean ratings are high (above 2, and many are 3) across all items: 100% of interns received a rating of competent on the majority of items and no intern received a rating below satisfactory (thus, we saw no need to present data for individual candidates).

Brief Interpretation as Evidence of Meeting Standards

Please see alignment with standards section above, together the portfolio items cover all domains, although certain items are more specific to some domains than others.

As noted above, by the end of the internship 100% of interns received at least a rating of satisfactory on all items, with a rating of “competent” being given on the majority of items. Several items that received relatively lower ratings should be noted. First, the 2009 cohort received a mean rating of 2.33 and the 2010 cohort a mean rating of 2.5 on the item “The report presents a clear description of classroom behavior, using systematic methods of observation. Observed factors that contribute to the student’s behavior (e.g., peers, instruction, etc.), and are relevant to the referral question(s), are highlighted.” This was simply because they neglected to include that information in their reports, not that they lacked skill in that area or failed to use appropriate methods for classroom observations. In all cases, the report was returned to the intern to add that information (all ratings were based on the first submission of the required product). This also applies to the additional few ratings that were relatively low (but still “satisfactory” or above): in all cases it was due to failure to address the item in a written report, not to a lack of competency in a domain.

ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SCORING RUBRIC WAS RECENTLY REVISED (FALL, 2010). INSTEAD OF THE 4-POINT SCALE THAT APPEARS IN THE HANDBOOK, THE FOLLOWING 3-POINT SCALE WAS USED FOR THE DATA PRESENTED BELOW:

1 = Unsatisfactory. (The student needs much more practice and supervision than the majority of other students at the same level of training).
2 = Satisfactory. (The student demonstrates skills consistent with current level of training. It is understood continued practice and supervision are recommended).
3 = Competent. (The student demonstrates mastery of this skill, requiring little, or no, additional supervision).

ASSESSMENT LINKED TO INTERVENTION REPORT: AGGREGATED SCORES ON ITEMS RATED BY FACULTY
Items	Class of 2008 N=10	Class of 2009 N=9	Class of 2010 N=8
Report is completed in a timely manner.	3.00	3.00	2.63
Appropriate headings are employed throughout the report.	3.00	3.00	3.00
A confidentiality statement is provided at the top of the first page.	3.00	3.00	3.00
The report provides one or more clear referral questions.	3.00	3.00	3.00
The report uses proper language mechanics (e.g., there are no spelling errors, grammar is appropriate; verbal tense remains the same throughout the report; paragraphs begin with clear topic sentences). The report uses effective language and keeps technical language and jargon to a minimum.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Assessment methods are listed and scores are reported in an accurate and clear fashion that is understandable to parents, teachers, and others.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Assessment methods that are employed follow logically from the referrals question(s).	3.00	3.00	3.00
Multiple assessment methods, with demonstrated validity and reliability, are employed, including (where appropriate) review of records, standardized tests, rating scales, curriculum-based assessment, classroom observations, and interviews with teacher, parent, and child.	3.00	3.00	2.88
School record review covers: (1) prior grades, (2) group achievement test scores, (3) examination of notes to parents and records of parent-teacher, or parent-principal meetings, (4) health records (e.g., vision and screening results), (5) records of behavior, (6) previous evaluation reports, and (7) previous and existing interventions related to the referral.	2.70	3.00	3.00
Parent/guardian interview covers (1) age of onset of problems, (2) course/prognosis of problem, (3) etiology (as appropriate), (4) family psychiatric history, (5) child’s educational history, and (6) social and emotional functioning. A semi-structured or structured interview format is used to assure that all pertinent areas are covered.	2.90	3.00	3.00
Teacher interview covers: (1) current classroom achievement in all pertinent areas (e.g., reading, mathematics), and (2) social and emotional functioning. Both strengths and weaknesses are identified.	3.00	3.00	2.88
The report presents a clear description of relevant behaviors of the child observed during testing.	3.00	3.00	3.00
The report presents a clear description of classroom behavior, using systematic methods of observation. Observed factors that contribute to the student’s behavior (e.g., peers, instruction, etc.), and are relevant to the referral question(s), are highlighted.	2.80	2.33	2.50
The report presents data that are helpful to the multidisciplinary team in determining diagnosis and/or eligibility for special services and for developing interventions.	3.00	3.00	2.88
The report synthesizes and integrates information from multiple sources, including school records, interviews, and standardized and CBA measures of ability, achievement, and social and emotional functioning. Results are presented in a coherent and integrated fashion (e.g., test by test reporting is avoided).	3.00	3.00	2.50
Data are presented and interpreted in a clear, accurate, and integrated manner throughout the report.	3.00	3.00	2.50
The report offers multiple, specific, research-supported, and practical recommendations that address the referral question(s) and that may serve as the basis for developing an IEP or intervention plan, where appropriate.	3.00	3.00	2.81
The report addresses eligibility for special education services (not typically done but necessary for purposes of this report)	3.00	3.00	2.88

COUNSELING CASE: ITEMS RATED BY FACULTY AND AGGREGATED SCORES
Activity	Class of 2008 N=10	Class of 2009 N=8	Class of 2010 N=8
History and treatment plan included	3.00	3.00	2.88
Relevant background presented	3.00	2.88	3.00
Brief description of presenting problem (including client’s perceptions)	3.00	2.88	2.88
Goals stated.	3.00	2.88	2.88
Proposed evaluation of progress methods explained.	3.00	2.75	2.50
Theoretical approach and techniques planned are outlined.	3.00	3.00	2.63
Progress note (of session reviewed) is included	2.50	3.00	2.69
Note is dated and signed.	3.00	3.00	2.88
Objective language used throughout.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Errors in record are noted by single line strike out and initialed.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Goal for session is stated.	3.00	3.00	2.50
Brief overview of client’s current status is presented.	3.00	2.88	2.75
Brief review of session content.	3.00	2.88	2.75
Evaluation of progress in session is noted.	3.00	2.88	2.50
Plan for next session is stated.	3.00	2.56	2.75
Termination documents included	2.50	2.88	2.88
Videotape of one or more sessions is included	2.95	2.88	2.94
Counselor conveys warmth and acceptance of client	3.00	2.88	3.00
Counselor uses basic listening and communication skills effectively (e.g., reflection, paraphrases, summarizations)	3.00	2.88	2.81
Counselor implements appropriate interventions during the session (e.g., reframes, externalizing the problem, cognitive restructuring).	3.00	2.75	2.50
Counselor demonstrates proper pacing and timing in the session (e.g., starts and stops on time, sets limits as appropriate).	3.00	2.75	2.88
Counselor closes session appropriately (e.g., includes plans for next session, reviews between session activities that have been planned).	3.00	2.88	2.50
Counselor self-critique completed	2.95	3.00	2.75
Counselor accurately identified strengths of the session.	3.00	3.00	2.75
Counselor accurately identified areas of needed improvement in the session.	3.00	2.94	3.00
Counselor made appropriate plans for improvement.	3.00	2.75	2.75
Supervision notes included.	2.50	3.00	2.88
Counselor demonstrated understanding of feedback through paraphrasing or summarizing supervisor comments.	3.00	3.00	2.88
Counselor was non-defensive.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Counselor adequately explained therapeutic choices made in the session when questioned.	3.00	3.00	3.00

CONSULTATION CASE: ITEMS RATED BY FACULTY AND AGGREGATED SCORES
	Class of 2008 N=10	Class of 2009 N=9	Class of 2010 N=8
Presents brief overview of the case and description of presenting problem.	2.90	3.00	3.00
Presents brief background history of the client.	2.95	3.00	3.00
Addresses any unusual circumstances that need to be explained (e.g., teacher's absences, resistance).			3.00
Accurately identifies strengths of interview.	2.90	2.89	2.88
Accurately identifies weaknesses of interview.	2.70	2.83	3.00
Suggests ways that identified weaknesses might have been avoided and/or addressed in next interview.	2.80	2.72	3.00
In general, report is well written (i.e., qualities of excellent writing are demonstrated, such or organization, clarity, grammar, etc.).	2.90	3.00	3.00
Presents opening statements that summarize the purpose of interview and what the consultee should expect	2.75	2.78	2.75
Elicits general examples of behavior(s) of concern	2.95	2.89	3.00
Identifies specific targeted behavior(s) and elicits examples thereof (as appropriate)	2.60	2.61	2.75
Elicits estimate of behavior’s strength	2.50	2.17	2.88
Tentatively defines goals/expectations for behavior improvement	2.50	2.44	2.88
Summarizes and evaluates above information (as appropriate)	2.55	2.75	2.88
Specifies situational context and tentatively explores various environmental and intraindividual factors	2.45	2.61	2.88
Tentatively explores factors outside of the situational context	2.38	2.75	2.88
Summarizes and validates contributing factors (as appropriate)	2.65	2.81	2.50
Explores existing interventions	2.60	2.71	2.88
Tentatively identifies replacement behaviors (and goal, as appropriate)	2.50	2.44	2.63
Summarizes procedures and replacement behaviors (as appropriate)	2.30	2.56	2.38
Determines recording procedures	2.30	2.67	2.75
Summarizes and clarifies recording procedures	2.83	3.00	2.50
Schedules plans for follow-up	3.00	3.00	2.63
Demonstrates appropriate level of interpersonal/problem solving skills, as evaluated with Interpersonal and Problem Solving Skills Checklist	2.8	2.88	2.75

COMPREHENSIVE CASE STUDY: ITEMS RATED BY FACULTY AND AGGREGATED SCORES
Activity	Class of 2008 N=10	Class of 2009 N=7	Class of 2010 N=8
Background history of the student is clearly reviewed and relevant to the problem (including diagnosis and previous interventions, as appropriate).	2.95	2.86	2.88
Special circumstances about the cases are explained, as appropriate (e.g., resistance, delays in project).	2.90	3.00	2.88
Problem behavior(s) is clearly identified and described in observable, measurable terms.	3.00	2.86	2.75
Problem behaviors are appropriately assessed, including the collection of baseline data and the use of functional behavioral assessment, where appropriate.	2.95	2.71	2.75
Problem behaviors are analyzed clearly and sufficiently (i.e., proximal and distal factors that contribute to the behaviors are explored).	2.75	2.86	3.00
Hypotheses linked to assessment are generated.	2.70	2.86	2.88
Problem solving process is collaborative.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Goals for intervention are clear, measurable, linked to assessment and problem analysis, and appropriate for the case.	3.00	2.79	2.63
Each component of the intervention is clearly described such that the intervention could be replicated by others.	2.95	2.93	2.75
Intervention is linked to results of formal and informal methods of problem solving assessment.	3.00	2.86	2.88
Intervention is linked directly to intervention goals.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Intervention is supported by theory and/or research.	2.80	2.43	2.75
Intervention is evaluated with appropriate methods.	2.90	2.79	2.88
Collaboration is seen in the intervention.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Positive outcomes are linked to the intervention and are clearly described and graphed (if applicable).	2.80	2.64	3.00
Suggestions for improving the intervention and for follow-up are discussed and appropriate to the case (e.g., possible modifications are described; discussion of whether the problem has been solved or requires further or different intervention).	2.70	2.36	2.75
In general, report is well written (i.e., qualities of excellent writing are demonstrated, such or organization, clarity, grammer, etc.).	3.0	2.86	3.00

SPECIAL PROJECT: ITEMS RATED BY FACULTYAND AGGREGATED SCORES
ITEMS	Class of 2008 N= 10	Class of 2009 N=7	Class of 2010 N=8
Project is of importance to the school building or district	3.00	3.00	3.00
Rationale for the project is clear	2.70	3.00	2.88
The goals of the project are clear	2.95	2.93	2.88
Implementation of the project (what, whom, when, and how) is well described	2.80	2.86	2.38
A collaborative problem solving process in applied throughout the project’s development, implementation, and evaluation	2.70	2.86	2.75
Interventions and/or methods are linked directly to the goals of the project	2.90	3.00	3.00
Appropriate statistical or evaluative techniques are employed	2.40	3.00	2.50
Results of the project are clearly presented	2.70	3.00	3.00
Limitations of the project are presented, as appropriate	3.00	3.00	2.88
Implications for practice and/or future research are delineated	2.60	3.00	2.38
Implications/recommendations are supported by research	2.60	2.57	2.38
Power point slides are well organized, clear, and appropriate for the given project	2.85	3.00	3.00
Data-based decision-making and accountability. For example, data were systematically collected, analyzed, and translated into practical interventions or recommendations.	2.70	3.00	3.00
Consultation and collaboration. For example, you collaborated effectively with teachers, administrators, families, or others in the planning and decision-making process.	3.00	2.41	2.75
Instructional, cognitive, or academic intervention, curriculum development, and/or evaluation. For example, you developed appropriate cognitive and academic goals for students or evaluated effectiveness of academic interventions.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Behavioral, social, or emotional intervention, curriculum development, and/or evaluation. For example, you developed a new social skills curriculum that you implemented and evaluated.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Student diversity. Your project included a diverse population of students (and collaborators, where appropriate) and you demonstrated sensitivity and skills needed to address their individual differences.	3.00	3.00	2.88
School and systems organization, policy development, and climate. You demonstrated an understanding of schools as systems, while helping to facilitate policies and practices that create and maintain safe, supportive, and effective learning environments.	2.90	3.00	2.88
Prevention, crisis intervention, and mental health. For example, you were effective in helping develop, implement, and evaluate a prevention program to promote mental health of students.	3.00	3.00	n/a
Home/school/community collaboration. Your project required joint collaboration between two or more of these components and you collaborated effectively with others to promote comprehensive services to children and families.	2.85	3.00	3.00
Research and program evaluation. This should apply to all projects. You demonstrated appropriate application of research and evaluation methods for improvement of services.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Ethical, professional, and legal dispositions and standards. You consistently demonstrated critical interpersonal, ethical, and legal competencies.	3.00	3.00	2.50
Information technology. You used information technology in multiple ways throughout your project. This includes but is not limited to: Power Point, e-mail, information searches using the web, and data management.	3.00	3.00	2.50

Assessment 6 Data: Impact on Student Learning: Comprehensive Case Study

NARRATIVE

Brief Description

The Comprehensive Case Study is part of the internship portfolio. This assessment was included in Assessment 5. The Comprehensive Case Study requires interns to demonstrate that the comprehensive range of services they provide has a measurable impact on children, youth, families, and other consumers. It is used by faculty trainers to evaluate student knowledge and professional expertise in collaborating with teachers, families and other professionals in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions that effectively respond to the educational and mental health needs of children and youth. Through this exercise students demonstrate their ability to take a case from start to finish: defining and analyzing the problem, developing appropriate goals for intervention, matching the problem analysis data to the interventions chosen, monitoring the intervention, and most importantly demonstrating its success in terms of student outcomes (either behavioral or academic).

The rubric for the comprehensive case study is based on that used by the National School Psychology Certification System for the purposes of awarding the NCSP.

Alignment with Standards

The Comprehensive Case Study touches upon all domains, but is aligned most directly with Domains 1 (Data-Based Decision-Making and Accountability), 2 (Consultation and Collaboration), 4 (Socialization and Development of Life Skills), and 7 (Prevention, Crisis Intervention, and Mental Health).

Brief Analysis of Data

As shown in the chart below (and under Assessment 5), interns received high ratings on items assessing the comprehensive case study. Across all items interns received either a “Satisfactory” or “Competent” (thus, we see no need to report ratings for individual candidates, as the mean should suffice).

Brief Interpretation as Evidence of Meeting Standards

The aggregated scores for this portfolio item show that the services of interns lead to positive outcomes for their clients, which would include domains 1, 2, 4, and 7.

ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SCORING RUBRIC WAS RECENTLY REVISED (FALL, 2010). INSTEAD OF THE 4-POINT SCALE THAT APPEARS IN THE HANDBOOK, THE FOLLOWING 3-POINT SCALE WAS USED FOR THE DATA PRESENTED BELOW:

1 = Unsatisfactory. (The student needs much more practice and supervision than the majority of other students at the same level of training).

2 = Satisfactory. (The student demonstrates skills consistent with current level of training. It is understood continued practice and supervision are recommended).

3 = Competent. (The student demonstrates mastery of this skill, requiring little, or no, additional supervision).

COMPREHENSIVE CASE STUDY: ITEMS RATED BY FACULTY AND AGGREGATED SCORES
Activity	Class of 2008 N=10	Class of 2009 N=7	Class of 2010 N=8
Background history of the student is clearly reviewed and relevant to the problem (including diagnosis and previous interventions, as appropriate).	2.95	2.86	2.88
Special circumstances about the cases are explained, as appropriate (e.g., resistance, delays in project).	2.90	3.00	2.88
Problem behavior(s) is clearly identified and described in observable, measurable terms.	3.00	2.86	2.75
Problem behaviors are appropriately assessed, including the collection of baseline data and the use of functional behavioral assessment, where appropriate.	2.95	2.71	2.75
Problem behaviors are analyzed clearly and sufficiently (i.e., proximal and distal factors that contribute to the behaviors are explored).	2.75	2.86	3.00
Hypotheses linked to assessment are generated.	2.70	2.86	2.88
Problem solving process is collaborative.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Goals for intervention are clear, measurable, linked to assessment and problem analysis, and appropriate for the case.	3.00	2.79	2.63
Each component of the intervention is clearly described such that the intervention could be replicated by others.	2.95	2.93	2.75
Intervention is linked to results of formal and informal methods of problem solving assessment.	3.00	2.86	2.88
Intervention is linked directly to intervention goals.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Intervention is supported by theory and/or research.	2.80	2.43	2.75
Intervention is evaluated with appropriate methods.	2.90	2.79	2.88
Collaboration is seen in the intervention.	3.00	3.00	3.00
Positive outcomes are linked to the intervention and are clearly described and graphed (if applicable).	2.80	2.64	3.00
Suggestions for improving the intervention and for follow-up are discussed and appropriate to the case (e.g., possible modifications are described; discussion of whether the problem has been solved or requires further or different intervention).	2.70	2.36	2.75
In general, report is well written (i.e., qualities of excellent writing are demonstrated, such or organization, clarity, grammer, etc.).	3.0	2.86	3.00

Assessment 7 Data: Alumni Survey

NARRATIVE

Brief Description

Every two years an Alumni Survey is sent to graduates of our program (i.e., graduates during the previous 2 years, which typically consists of about 17 graduates, including 1 or 2 graduates of our PhD program). Because the number of PhD graduates is very small and respondents could thus be identified, we do not ask respondents to report which program they completed. Also, please note that with the exception of two courses, (the human development and statistics courses), which are completed at the doctoral level, PhD candidates complete the same course and field requirements of EdS candidates (and more). Thus, for these two reasons we do not separate the EdS candidates from the PhD candidates. The results clearly pertain to both programs.

The survey consists of two sections. Section I, Assessment of Competencies, and Section II, Feedback on the Program. Section I consists of 11 general items, each aligned with the one of the 11 NASP domains.

Note that results of Section II, consisting of questions about program changes and areas of strengths and needed and potential program modifications, are presented below but are reviewed in Section V of this report.

Eight graduates completed the survey in 2008 and 10 completed in 2010 (note that the 2008 survey was sent to 2 PhD graduates who graduated in 2005 and the 2010 survey was sent to two who graduated in either 2008 or 2009. It is unknown how many of them completed it, however).

Alignment with Standards

All 11 domains are represented by this assessment, as the items are brief descriptions of each domain. One general item aligns with each domain.

Brief Analysis of Data

As seen below, all graduates rated themselves as being either “effective” or “very effective” in 8 of 11 domains. The only exceptions were:

· In 2010, one graduate gave a rating of “ineffective” for 3 domains: Diversity, Socialization, and Research. This graduate (and others) noted that working with special populations (e.g., children with autism and other low incidence disabilities) was a weakness of our program.

· In 2008, 2 graduates gave a rating of “ineffective” for the Diversity domain.

· No graduate gave a rating of “Very Ineffective” in any domain.

Brief Interpretation as Evidence of Meeting Standards

Results show that the clear majority of our graduates (16 of 20 respondents) consider themselves to be effective or very effective in all domains.

The only area in which several graduates gave a rating of “ineffective” (2 in 2008 and only 1 in 2010) was the domain of diversity. Comments by these graduates indicate that this was largely due to concerns about not having adequate training working with low incidence populations. Assessing and programming for children with autism has received much attention in DE recently and we believe the low ratings reflect these concerns. One graduate in 2008 (one of the same above) rated himself/herself ineffective in Domain 4 (Socialization). Again, we think this reflects concerns about being qualified to serve children with autism. This graduate also rated himself/herself as ineffective in Domain 9 (Research). It is very unclear why this rating was given, as written comments provided us with no insight. We have never heard of this concern before in the history of the program.

Note, as discussed in Section V, a new course was added last year on assessment of children with low incidence disabilities.

ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

Survey items appear below, followed by a table of aggregated data. Scoring is self-evident.

University of Delaware

School Psychology Program Alumni Survey

2010

Year of Graduation (i.e., completed internship): ________

Section I: Assessment of Competencies

Please rate the overall effectiveness of the University of Delaware’s program in providing you with knowledge and skills in each of the following NASP “domains of school psychology” described below. Please circle your answer.

Data based decision making and accountability. School psychologists use a decision-making process to identify problem areas (at the individual, group, and systems level), collect information to understand the problem and to identify strengths and needs, make or facilitate decisions about service delivery, and evaluate the outcomes of services.