Students develop competence in the scientific, theoretical and conceptual foundations of professional school psychology.

Students demonstrate competency in the scientific, methodological and theoretical foundations of professional school psychology.

Successfully pass the National School Psychology Exam (PRAXIS). The PRAXIS is a national licensing exam that assesses competence of the candidate with respect to the following test subcategories: Diagnosis and Fact-Finding; Prevention and Intervention; Applied Psychological Foundations; Applied Educational Foundations; Ethical and Legal Considerations.

Minimum score of 165 and 70% correct on each of the 5 categories of the PRAXIS exam (a national exam that certifies school psychologists). Attached to the document is a copy of a PRAXIS report. The actual exam is copyrighted and we cannot, at this time, present it.

All students passed the PRAXIS. The range of scores 175-184 with a mean of 179.60; A passing score in the State of Texas on this test is 165. For the subtests, criterion was 70% on each of the five subtests. Two individuals scored below criterion on "RESEARCH BASED ACADEMIC PRACTICES," scoring a 60% and a 67%, respectively. Three students scored a 69.2% on "ETHICAL/LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL FOUNDATIONS."

Although, overall, all students passed the PRAXIS, three scored a 69.2% on Ethical Foundations and two had trouble on Research Based Academic Practices. All in all, though, nobody failed to reach criterion on more than one subtest, and three were very close to meeting criterion. Be that as it may, beginning in the Fall 2010 semester, ethical and legal foundation will be stressed in each of the classes taken by students in the SSP Program. We also will continue to stress the importance of research based academic practices.

Students develop competence in skill application of professional school psychology in a public school setting.

Students in the school psychology program demonstrate knowledge and skills for application of professional school psychology in a public school setting in the areas of assessment and consultation.

(1) Satisfactory ratings from University supervisors
     (1A) and on-site supervisors
     (1B) on the Internship Rating Form.
On-site supervisors are required for each student to submit ratings that assess questions such as: knowledge of consultation/collaboration models and methods, knowledge of family influences, collaborates effectively with school personnel, uses research gathered for improvement of services, knowledgeable of ethical standards, etc., etc.

(2) Satisfactory scores from the Program Faculty on their final portfolios. Portfolios include: a current vita, a personal essay, a record and description of consultation cases, assessment cases, counseling cases, and behavioral intervention cases. In addition, internship logs are included as well as PRAXIS scores and competency evaluation forms completed by the field supervisors.

1A) On a three point scale ranging from "Needing improvement (1)" to "Competent (2)" to "Professionally Competent (3)," students will not fall below a "2" on any of the criteria as rated by their on-site supervisor. 

1B) On a five-point scale ranging from "Very Poor (1)" to "Below Average(2) to "Average(3)" to "Above Average (4)" to "Excellent (5)" the student will attain a rating of no less than 3 on any competency skill on the final evaluation, as rated by the university supervisor and no less than 3 on overall rating of competency. 2) Overall score of not less than 3 on a 5-point likert scale on student Portfolios rated by Program Faculty.

There were six students in Fall 2009 and eight individuals in Spring 2010 who participated in the practicum experience.

1A. On-site supervisors rated our practicum students well. On each skill, our students were consistently rated at 2 or above. Occasionally, a student was rated as "Improvement Needed." This generally seemed to occur under the skill "Knowledgeable of family systems." Because this occurred with a few individuals, it rated a red flag to the faculty.

1B. With respect to the supervisors' rating forms, each was rated according to 36 skills and an overall assessment. For the Fall 2009 semester, on the overall assessment, three scored a "3 (Average)" and three scored a "4 (Above Average)." For the Spring 2010 semester, five scored a "3 (Average)" and three scored a "4 (Above Average)." With respect to individual competency scores, for Fall 2009, one student had a "2" on "Adaptability/Flexibility" One student had "2s" on "Ability to Manage Stress," Communicates Effectively," Exhibits interest and Enthusiasm," and "Promptness." All other scores were 3 or above. For the Spring 2010 semester, one student had a "2" on "Applying Problem Solving Skills." All other scores, across the board, for all other students were a 3 or better.

2. With respect to portfolios, one student had a 2 on three of the 36 items although the final assessment resulted in an acceptable level of performance. The mean overall rating for all students on their portfolios was 4.16 with no student falling below a 3 on any of the ratings.

Reviewing supervisors' assessments semiannually appears to have worked given the better performance in the Spring 2010 assessment compared with Fall 2009. Concerning the student with "2"s on three of the 36 items, the faculty members in the program have been meeting with the student on a continuing basis to make sure that he is performing at an acceptable level. This is also the case for the person who scored a "2" on "Adaptability and Flexibility."