Having reviewed the assessment data supplied at last month's meeting, what themes do you see emerging that we could discuss?
This discussion is required by NCATE . . .
Just as a reminder, it was this data from previous years that prompted us to drop EDUC-K205 and add EDUC-P407 to the undergraduate program. We discerned that our students were lacking in assessment training and their comments indicated they felt they were getting more special education coursework than they needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Also, let me know if you want the data distributed or presented differently. I can't promise that we will be able to do it exactly as you might wish, but I can try with the help of David and Donna Pandori.
ReplyDeleteNot that this may be possible, but I would also be interested to see how they are defining 'special education' coursework - specifically are they viewing the content area reading class as for struggling students only, and incorrectly calling it special education? If so, this is a conception that needs to continue to be addressed in the course.
ReplyDeleteI really feel that gen ed students need some ENL in secondary, but I have no idea how to do that or if the data supports that.
ReplyDelete