| I. Mission Statement of School
Psychology: The School Psychology program embraces a training model based
upon the application of the principles of scientific methodology to the school
setting, e.g., a school psychologist is a data-based problem-solver who is able
to bring his/her knowledge (psychological and educational) and skills
(diagnostic and prescriptive) to bear on school-related problems, generating
viable and testable hypotheses about the problem that can be evaluated in light
of continued data gathering. Within this model, the program emphasizes the
application of theory and research to practical and applied problems and
settings within the ecology of the schools. It is the expectation of the program
that students will be trained to meet these guidelines and that they will be
competent professional problem-solvers who are compassionate and caring in their
service. It is also the expectation of this program that students graduating
will meet NASP guidelines for training, be certifiable in the State of South
Carolina at Level II, and eligible for National Certification. |
| |
| II. Expected Results for the School Psychology
Program
|
| The Psychology Department is committed to
training the highest level service providers in school psychology that can be
obtained at the specialist level. To insure this goal, the following results are
expected: |
| |
| A. Accreditation
|
| The School Psychology Program
will maintain its accreditation with the National Association of School
Psychologist (NASP) in order for its graduates to be eligible for
Certification in the State of South Carolina at Level II and for National
Certification. |
| |
| B. Student Knowledge of Scientific Methodology
|
| Students in the School
Psychology Program will demonstrate a knowledge of scientific methodology as
it applies to the school setting. |
| |
| C. Student Knowledge of School
Psychology
|
| Students will develop the
knowledge necessary to function as school psychologists |
| |
| D. Student skills in School
Psychology
|
| Students will develop the
skills necessary to function as school psychologists. |
| |
| E. Recruitment and Completion
|
| School Psychology program will
be successful at recruiting quality students and assisting students in
completing the program. |
| |
| F. Program Evaluation
|
| School Psychology program will
continue to monitor and evaluate the quality of our program and our students. |
| |
| G. Quality of Instruction
|
| The School Psychology teaching
faculty will provide excellent teaching, advisement, and supervision to
students in the program. |
| |
| III. Assessment Tools: |
| A. Accreditation
|
| |
| B. Student Knowledge of Scientific Methodology
|
| 1. Thesis |
| 2. Conference presentations |
| 3. Journal publications |
| |
| C. Student Knowledge of School Psychology
|
| 1. NTE scores |
| 2. Course grades |
| |
| D. Student skills in School Psychology
|
| 1. Field Supervisor Rating
Form |
| 2. Efficacy Rating Form |
| 3. Case Study |
| |
| E. Recruitment and Completion
|
| 1. Admissions criteria |
| 2. Graduation rates |
| |
| F. Program Evaluation
|
| 1. Advisory Board |
| 2. "Grid" of
student progress |
| 3. Student Progress Report |
| 4. Exit interviews with
interns |
| 5. Alumni Survey |
| |
| G. Quality of Instruction
|
| 1. Teaching Evaluation by
Students |
| 2. Number of advisement and
supervision problems |
| 3. Efficacy Rating Form |
| |
| IV. Assessment Results of School Psychology
Program
|
| A. Accreditation:
|
| The Graduate Program in School Psychology has
maintained its accreditation by the National Association of School Psychologists
(NASP/NCATE). Our accreditation is due to expire December, 2003. Thus, during
the 2001-2002 school year, the school psychology committee held several meetings
to review new NASP training standards (July, 2000) and begin putting together
our folio for NASP review. One noted change the accreditation requirements has
an effect on the teaching load of the Program Director. To be in compliance
with accreditation standards, the Program Director for School Psychology will be
scheduled for six hours. To comply with this requirement, she will be
scheduled for one class and the internships. |
| |
| B. Assessment of Scientific Knowledge:
|
| 1. Thesis |
| As part of their
demonstration of scientific knowledge, students are required to successfully
complete a thesis and present the results of their thesis at a professional
meeting. All students in the 2001-2002 school year who have defended their
thesis before the faculty have been successful. |
| |
| 2. Conference Presentations |
| An examination of the number
of presentations by our students indicates that they are being successful in
having their papers accepted at professional meetings. Below is a listing of
presentations involving our school psychology students. |
| |
| Gourdine, T.,
& Bell, N.L. (March, 2002). The academic performance of students with learning disabilities
vs low achieving peers. Presentation at annual conference, South
Carolina Psychologists Association, North Charleston, SC. |
| |
| Hogan-Piscatelli,
K., & Bell, N.L. (March, 2002). Racial differences on reading probes of curriculum-based
measurement. Presentation at annual conference, South Carolina
Psychologists Association, North Charleston, SC. |
| |
| Lane, J. &
Bell, N.L. (March, 2002). Gender differences on math probes of curriculum-based
measurement. Presentation at annual conference, South Carolina
Psychologists Association, North Charleston, SC. |
| |
| Taylor, T., &
Bell, N.L. (March, 2002). A comparison of teachers' perceptions of student achievement with
actual student achievement as measured by curriculum-based measurement.
Presentation at annual conference, South Carolina Psychologists
Association, North Charleston, SC. |
| |
| Bell, N.L., Andreucci, M.K., & Summers, O. (March, 2002). Assessment of
children with ESL and the validity
of the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test. Presentation at annual
national conference, National Association of School Psychologists,
Chicago, IL. |
| |
| Saylor, C.,
Cowart, B., & Mainor, M. (2002, March). Social skills, sports,
& recreation in three child
populations. Presented at Southeastern Psychological Association
Meeting. Orlando, FL. |
| |
| Saylor, C.,
Finch, A., Fig, N., Jackson, C., & Cowart, B. (2002, August). September
11 media exposure: Impact
on elementary students. Accepted for presentation at American
Psychological Association. Chicago, IL. |
| |
| Corner, C.,
Lassiter, K., & Matthews, T. (March, 2002). The validity of the Wide
Range Intelligence Test.
Presented at the 48th annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological
Association, Orlando, FL. |
| |
| Feedback, G.,
Lassiter, & Matthews, T. (March, 2002). The validity of the CTONI. Presented at the 48th annual
meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, Orlando, FL. |
| |
| 3. Journal Publication |
| An examination of the
publications involving our school psychology students indicates that they
are publishing articles at a good rate. Below is a listing of articles
involving our school psychology students. |
| |
| Lassiter, K.S.,
Matthews, T.D., Bell, N.L., & Maher, C.M. (In press). Comparison of the General Ability Measure
for Adults and the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test with
college students. Psychology in the Schools. |
| |
| Bell, N.L.,
Rucker, M., Alexander, J., Finch, A. (2002). Predictive Validity of the Slosson’s Full-Range
Intelligence Test: Comparison with the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children-Third Edition and the Woodcock Johnson Tests of
Achievement-Revised. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 31-37. |
| |
| Lassiter, K.S.,
Bell, N.L., Hutchinson, M.B., & Matthews, T.D. (2001). College students' performance on The
General Abilities Measurement for Adults and the Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale--Third Edition. Psychology in the Schools, 38,
1-10. |
| |
| Lassiter, K.S.,
Harrison, T.K., Matthews, T.D., & Bell, N.L. (2001). The validity of
the Comprehensive Test of
Nonverbal Intelligence as a measure of fluid intelligence. Assessment,
8, 95-103. |
| |
| Bell, N.L.,
Lassiter, K.S., Matthews, T.D., & Hutchinson, M.B. (2001).
Comparison of the Peabody Picture
Vocabulary Test-Third Edition and Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale-Third Edition with University Students. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 57, 417-422. |
| |
| Clifford, S.,
Saylor, C., Macias, M., & Kreh, S. (2001). Psychological factors affecting support service
interest in families of children with Spina Bifida. Children's Health
Care, 30 (1), 57-65. |
| |
| C. Assessment of Student Knowledge of School
Psychology
|
| 1. NTE Scores |
| All students take the School
Psychology section of the National Teachers Exam (NTE) administered by ETS.
During the 2001-2002 school year, graduating student scores ranged from a
high of 820 to a low of 670 with a mean score of 734. The South Carolina
Department of Education requires a minimum NTE score of 660 for
certification. The National Association of School Psychology also requires a
minimum NTE score of 660 for national certification. Thus, all students
passed the NTE and met criteria for both state and national certification. |
| |
| 2. Course Grades |
| Students' course grades are monitored by the
Program Director using a grid of student progress. This grid is updated
regularly and monitors academic standing of students. During the 2001-2002
school year, we had approximately 48 students taking courses on campus
during the Fall semester (does not include students out on internship) and
51 students taking courses on campus during the Spring semester (does not
include students out on internship). Of these students, one was terminated
from the program for inadequate academic performance during the Fall
semester, and four students were given warnings regarding poor academic
performance. All other students earned grades of B or better in each course. |
| |
| D. Student Skills in School Psychology
|
| 1. Field Supervisor Rating Form |
| The Field Supervisor Rating Form is completed
at the end of the student's internship. During the Fall 2001 semester, each
intern was given a grade of "A" by his/her field supervisor with
the exception of one student who earned a grade of "B+". By Spring
2002 semester, each intern earned a grade of "A" for the second
half of internship. |
| |
| 2. Efficacy Rating Form |
| The Efficacy Rating Form is completed by the
internship supervisor for each of the interventions attempted by the intern.
All students earned a rating of "good" to "excellent"
ratings on the Efficacy Rating form. |
| |
| 3. Case Study |
| New this year was the introduction of a Case
Study to be completed by each intern and turned into the Coordinator of
Internships for review. Informal review of the case studies during 2001-2002
school year revealed all interns demonstrating competency in interventions.
A formal review/evaluation process of the case studies will be initiated
during 2002-2003 school year. |
| |
| E. Recruitment and Completion
|
| 1. Admission Criteria |
| A total of 24 students were admitted to the
School Psychology Program during the October 15, 2001 and March 15, 2002
admissions review. Of these students, 3 have previous Master's degrees and
the average GRE score was 1020 (n=18) and the average MAT score was 52 (n=3) |
| |
| 2. Graduation Rates |
| The College of Graduate and
Professional Studies awarded 8 Educational Specialist degrees and 12 Master
of Arts in Psychology degrees to School Psychology graduate students during
the 2001-2002 academic year. |
| |
| F. Program Evaluation
|
| 1. Advisory Board |
| The Advisory Board met during the Spring 2002
semester. Topics discussed included strengths/weaknesses of our students,
commonly used assessment instruments, issues the school districts are
currently dealing with and future trends for the field of school psychology.
As a result of this meeting, several assessment course syllabi were modified
to address the popular instruments (e.g., Psyc 504, Psyc 505) and a review
of course content will take place, examining teaching of behavioral
assessments and interventions. |
| |
| 2. "Grid" of Student Progress |
| As evidenced by our "Grid",
approximately 90% of our students are making adequate academic progress. |
| |
| 3. Student Progress Report |
| Each student was reviewed by
the School Psychology Committee with input from other faculty members at the
end of the Fall and Spring semesters using the Student Progress Report. This
evaluation monitors not only the academic development but also personal and
professional development of students. Areas assessed include interpersonal
skills, professionalism, attitudes, etc. Students are given feedback each
semester on areas needing improvement. |
| |
| 4. Exit Interviews with Interns |
| Exit interviews with interns were conducted
in April 2002. Student feedback revealed they felt very prepared for
assessment of children's problems, report writing, and consultation. They
emphasized that they felt they were given a good foundation upon which to
build with future learning. There were mixed reviews on how well-prepared
they felt for behavioral assessment and intervention. Subsequently, this
issue will be reviewed by examining syllabi from Psyc 501 and Psyc 606 and
discussion with appropriate faculty members. |
| |
| 5. Alumni Survey |
| Alumni Survey will be mailed out Summer 2002 |
| |
| G. Teaching, Advisement, and Supervision
|
| 1. Teaching Evaluation by Students |
| Teaching Evaluations by
Students were reviewed to be at or above the mean for all graduate programs
across the institution. |
| |
| 2. Number of Advisement and Supervision
Problems |
| Advisement and supervision
problems have decreased--the number of course substitutions required to
accommodate students has decreased, indicating a better response in
advisement and course scheduling. |
| |
| 3. Efficacy Rating Form |
| All students earned "good" to
"excellent" ratings on the Efficacy Rating form indicating that
our internship students are generating interventions that are effective and
which provide positive outcomes for children served. |
| |
| V. Conclusions about Graduate Program in School
Psychology
|
| Assessment results indicate that the School
Psychology Program is doing well. All indicators suggest that the program is
attracting students who are learning and developing skills in the area. We
need to concentrate on the NASP accreditation application this next year. |
| |
| VI. Resources Required for Graduate Program in
School Psychology
|
| A. Continued secretarial, library, and computer
support services. In addition, secretarial support after 5:00pm is needed due
to the nature of the program. |
| |
| B. Continued financial support to purchase test
kits and test protocols. |
| |
| C. Continued graduate assistants to work the
Psychological Service Laboratory during day and evening to provide support to
graduate students. |
| |
| D. Course reduction for Program Director. |
|
| »
2002
IE Summary Report |
| »
2002
IE Data Report |
