Melba Spooner

Student Ratings of Instruction in Distance Learning and On-Campus Classes

Abstract Student ratings in 2 special education courses offered on campus and off campus using different means of instruction, including electronic media, were compared. Ratings also were compared when distance classes were taught at local and remote facilities. End-of-course student evaluations were examined using a counterbalanced design. A comparison of outcome measures revealed no difference in the overall course means. Outcome measures for on-campus students versus off-campus students for the 2 courses were examined, but no differences were found in the overall ratings. Course, instructor, teaching, and communication ratings were similar across settings and courses. Implications for future research in evaluating instruction at a distance are suggested.

Distance Education and Special Education: Promises, Practices, and Potential Pitfalls

Shortages of trained personnel in special education are widely recognized. This need typically translates to special education programs as efforts to increase the numbers of professionals who are appropriately prepared to teach students with disabilities. The difficulty of increasing on-campus sections to respond effectively to the escalating need for more and better trained teachers, has in some cases led to an increased emphasis on alternative ways to deliver required course work. Distance learning is one such alternative. Distance learning can be defined as the separation of the learner from the instructor in location (learner and instructor in different rooms or at different sites), and, in some instances, by time. The promise of distance learning offers an attractive alternative for increasing the numbers of appropriately prepared special education personnel by making college-level instruction easier to receive. Current practices support synchronous communication (e.g., two-way audio, two-way video in real time, or two-way audio, one-way video in real time) and asynchronous communication (E-mail, or the Asynchronous Learning Network which does not necessarily occur in real time but at varying times depending on participants needs). Although it is possible to increase enrollments via distance learning, professionals recognize that there are some potential problems as well. If careful planning and course delivery are not clearly articulated students at remote sites can feel as if they are not part of the whole and that the education they are receiving is substandard. This article reviews promises, practices, and pitfalls associated with distance learning in an effort to inform special education professionals about this increasingly popular personnel preparation alternative.

Is More Really Better? Examining Perceived Benefits of an Extended Student Teaching Experience

The authors surveyed student teachers in a yearlong internship and their peers in a traditional semester-long internship to compare perceptions across different practice teaching experiences. All participants were enrolled in the same university and were similar across gender, age, ethnicity, and undergraduate educational experiences. The students in the yearlong internship reported a better relationship with their supervising teacher, greater knowledge of school policies and procedures, and higher scores for the perceived adequacy of time spent in school than did the students in the semester internship. The two groups did not differ in perceptions of their teaching ability, which were generally favorable. The authors discuss the outcomes regarding continuing challenges professional development programs face when building and sustaining effective clinical experiences.

Preparing Personnel with Expertise in Severe Disabilities in the Electronic Age: Innovative Programs and Technologies

Teacher shortages in special education in general and, specifically, in severe disabilities continue to be acute, despite concentrated personnel preparation efforts. The application of telecommunications technologies is viewed as a potentially effective way to systematically impact these shortages. We describe two federally funded distance education programs in the area of severe disabilities, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte project (UNC Charlotte) and project UPLIFT (Utah Consortium for Low Incidence Faculty and Teachers), each of which uses a multi-university consortium. We also discuss the technologies employed in each project. Preliminary data illustrating the use of end of course student evaluations are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of distance education course delivery in the area of severe disabilities. The potential benefit of preparing personnel via distance delivery through using multi-university consortia is discussed and topics for future research are suggested.

The CAEP Standards and Research on Educator Preparation Programs: Linking Clinical Partnerships with Program Impact.

Responding to the challenge of more rigorous and outcome-oriented program evaluation criteria of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), authors take a critical look at the intersection of two standards: Clinical Partnerships and Practice (Standard 2) and Program Impact (Standard 4). Illustrating one aspect of a secondary education teacher preparation program, authors consider how clinical partnerships can be designed in light of these standards to have a positive impact on P-12 student learning. Focusing on the program evaluation framework, authors describe a spectrum of diverse formative and summative growth measures that document the scope of impact for all stakeholders, including students. In light of the Feuer, Floden, Chudowsky, and Ahn (2013) questioning framework, authors assess program outcomes. In closing, the authors (a) conclude that comprehensive evaluation models are needed to document complex outcomes, which will make program impact more visible and measureable; (b) recommend using the Feuer et al. decision-making framework to initiate and guide programmatic design and evaluation model development; and (c) affirm CAEPs expectations—clinical partnerships go beyond positive relationships, coselection of mentor teachers and candidates, and commitment to diverse settings to ensuring P-12 student achievement—as attainable goals for educator preparation accreditation.

Reviewing and Refining: A Professional Education Unit's Journey Toward Accreditation

This manuscript seeks to share the continuous improvement endeavors by the College of Education faculty and administration at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte from initial preparation and planning through their successful national and state accreditation achieved in November 2005. Beginning with the units revision of their conceptual framework and alignment of their professional educator preparation programs to the revised National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education standards, the authors hope to provide concrete illustrations of how very basic elements of collaboration, shared decision making, open communication, and purposeful engagement among all constituents led to successful achievement of national and state accreditation, and may be accomplished by other universities and colleges as they pursue this milestone achievement toward excellence in teacher education.

Contributing to the Profession in Meaningful Ways.

Abstract All college and university faculty are expected to engage in professional development activities related to teaching, designing, conducting, reporting, and disseminating original research, and providing service. Those new to the profession are often overwhelmed by the competing demands of contributing to the profession in meaningful ways. This is particularly true with regard to research where their scholarship and professional writing activities typically involve submitting articles for review and publication consideration as well as serving on editorial boards providing reviews of the scholarship of others. Skills, competencies, and professional development behaviors related to dealing with reviews, working with reviewers, or reviewing the work of others are seldom included in formal advanced graduate preparation; and, if included at all, more often than not, they are passed on from advisor to student as hit-or-miss mentoring experiences in the context of the culture of the scholarship, the professorate, and advanced graduate education. Considerations are provided in this article for dealing with reviews of ones work, working with professional reviewers, and preparing reviews of the work of others. Careful use of this information will facilitate professional development, particularly for new faculty, and contribute to the expression and use of ideas that are expected and accepted in a broad, established academic tradition.