1 / 19

Successful project profiles: Benefits of long-term OSEP investments in personnel preparation

Successful project profiles: Benefits of long-term OSEP investments in personnel preparation. Chriss Walther-Thomas, Ph.D. University of Kansas Ben Lignugaris/Kraft, Ph.D. Utah State University Maya Israel, M.S.Ed., University of Kansas. Advance Organizer. Background Project Intent

betsy
Download Presentation

Successful project profiles: Benefits of long-term OSEP investments in personnel preparation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Successful project profiles: Benefits of long-term OSEP investments in personnel preparation Chriss Walther-Thomas, Ph.D. University of Kansas Ben Lignugaris/Kraft, Ph.D. Utah State University Maya Israel, M.S.Ed., University of Kansas

  2. Advance Organizer • Background • Project Intent • Profile Development • Initial Data • Next Steps

  3. Background • OSEP funds have made a tremendous difference in our efforts to prepare qualified: • special education teachers • related services providers • teacher educators • program administrators • school researchers.

  4. Background (cont.) • Grant information is collected during grant years, but not once the initial funding ends. • Little public information is available about the long-term benefits of OSEP projects • Critics have questioned the lasting value of these important investments in special education personnel preparation

  5. Project Intent • Showcase the lasting benefits from OSEP funded personnel preparation and leadership projects • Share these profiles with stakeholders to demonstrate the significant impact of the IDEA personnel preparation program • e.g. Congressional delegations, state education leaders, university administrators, professional associations

  6. Project Intent • The profiles will help policymakers and other education leaders develop a better understanding about the lasting value of OSEP funding in the preparation of special education personnel!!

  7. Project Collaborators:

  8. Profile Development Process • Summer 2008: • Survey development • Solicitation of project profiles: Initial online survey sent to HECSE and TED membership • Template development

  9. Profile Development Process (cont.) • Fall 2008 • Initial data analysis • What areas of emphasis/disability are not yet represented? • What geographic areas are not well represented • November/December, 2008 • Directed call for profiles based on data analysis • HECSE/TED website announcement • Invitations to submit profiles in “missing areas”

  10. Profile Development Process (cont.) • Spring 2009 • Profile editing and finalizing • Publications • Online • Print • Begin Dissemination Efforts • Hill visit and briefing • Online database • Etc.

  11. Phase 1: Call for Profiles • Identify exemplary OSEP-funded personnel preparation projects that have continued to evolve, expand, and yield benefits after the initial funding period ended. • Identify a broad array of profiles illustrating a variety of student outcomes, institutions, geographic regions, and preparation emphases.

  12. Phase 1: Call for Profiles (cont.) • Lasting impact on institution’s capacity to prepare new special education teachers or doctoral-level special education personnel. • Either a previously-funded OSEP project or one that may be ending soon. 

  13. Demonstrate Measurable Outcomes • Benefits that resulted from the “seed money” OSEP provided such as: • new distance-learning technology applications • new tenure-track faculty positions • new state or private funding sources • new student scholarships • new LEA-IHE preparation partnerships • changes in state licensure regulations • new induction and mentoring programs • Etc.  

  14. Disability emphasis High incidence Low incidence Autism Etc. Project focus Assessment PBS RtI Tech. integration Cultural competence Etc. Community focus Urban Suburban Rural All Project intent Prepare students in existing programs Expand existing program Build a new program Additional Data

  15. Mentoring efforts Recruitment efforts Content delivery Face to face Online Combination of both Collaboration efforts Participants Licensure Paraeducators Doctoral students Project completion Additional Data (cont.)

  16. Emerging Trends • 31 states and DC represented • States with most grants represented include Florida, and California • Most states have one or two grants represented. • Teacher Licensure vs. Leadership Preparation • 72.7% Teacher licensure • 27.3% Doctoral level preparation

  17. Autism Deaf/Hard of Hearing Transition Special/general education collaboration Content area emphasis Literacy Math Science Paraeducators PBS Phase 2: Call for Profiles • More details about measurable outcomes!!!! • We will contact you for more information if the profiles have missing data.

  18. Phase 2: Call for Profiles • Information posted on the HECSE and TED websites • www.hecse.net • www.tedcec.org • If you have an OSEP funded personnel preparation program that would fit into the abovementioned categories email Maya Israel at mayaosh@ku.edu

  19. Dissemination • Print documents • Initial profiles publication: April, 2009 • Hill briefing in early spring, 2009 • Online database • Searchable by disability category and geography

More Related