• My UD
  • UDSIS-Students
  • UDSIS-Staff
  • Sakai
  • E-mail
• People
• Maps
• Find It
• A-Z
  • Z
  • Y
  • X
  • W
  • V
  • U
  • T
  • S
  • R
  • Q
  • P
  • O
  • N
  • M
  • L
  • K
  • J
  • I
  • H
  • G
  • F
  • E
  • D
  • C
  • B
  • A
• UD Home

M.A. in School Psychology

School Psychology Handbook: Program Evaluation

The school psychology program is committed not only to assessing students in an ongoing and systematic fashion, but also to assessing the program's effectiveness. For the purpose of improving the overall quality of the program, the following performance-based measures of program effectiveness are used:

1. Course and Instructor Evaluations. As required by the University, students complete a course and instructor evaluation form (in class or on-line) at the end of each course. Please take these evaluations seriously. Results are reviewed by the individual faculty member and by the Director of the School of Education, both of whom examine aggregated scores as well as written comments from students. This information is used not only to improve courses, but also is used to help determine the promotion and salaries of individual, full-time faculty members. Where appropriate, be sure to recommend ways that a course might be improved.
2. Evaluations of Field Supervisors. In addition to evaluating courses and course instructors, you also are required to evaluate your practica and internship placements and the respective supervisors. Again, please take these evaluations seriously. Your evaluations are used by the university-based field supervisor and program coordinator to select and maintain quality sites. Your feedback is kept confidential, however.
3. Ratings of Students by Field Supervisors. With regard to evaluating the effectiveness of the program, ratings of our students by their field supervisors are of critical importance. Such ratings reflect not only the competencies of our students, but also reflect the quality of the training they receive. Ratings for all skills and competencies are aggregated across students. We look closely at these ratings and attempt to make changes in our program, as needed, when a pattern of low ratings is detected across students.
4. Internship Portfolio. The internship is a culminating experience during which students are expected to integrate and apply knowledge and skills in multiple domains of school psychology. In addition to supervisor ratings of specific skills, interns are evaluated via an assessment of a comprehensive, performance-based portfolio. The results of this assessment reflect not only the skills of our interns, but the quality of the training they receive throughout the program. As with supervisor ratings, patterns of weakness across interns indicate the need for us to make improvements in our training.
5. Exit Interviews of Interns. Near the end of the internship, we ask interns how we might improve our program. We listen, and have made changes, based on that input.
6. National Exam in School Psychology. This is another indicator of both student competencies and the quality of the program. With respect to program evaluation, scores on the national exam are aggregated and closely examined.
7. Surveys of Field Supervisors. Our field supervisors tend to represent the best school psychologists in the profession. We truly respect their feedback about students and the program. During most site visits of practicum and internship placements, we solicit such feedback. A more systematic and deliberate attempt to solicit their feedback occurs during the individual exit interview with the intern and his/her supervisor.
8. Surveys of Students and Alumni. Periodically, we ask students and graduates to complete comprehensive surveys in which they are asked to evaluate the program and offer specific recommendations for improvement. The last survey was conducted in spring of 2006. The past survey led to several course changes.
9. Admissions, Graduation Rates, Paid Internships, and Employment of Graduates.  We closely examine admissions data, paying particular attention to the quality and diversity of those offered, and those accepting, admission. We also closely monitor the percentage of students who successfully complete the program (approximately 90% have done so over the past 10 years), the percentage of students receiving paid internships (100% have received paid internships, with most paying $16,000)), and percentage of graduates who are offered a full-time position in school psychology (100%).
10. Reviews for Accreditation. Approximately every 5-7 years, the program is reviewed by several accreditation agencies. The most thorough and comprehensive of these reviews is jointly conducted by the National Association of School Psychologists and the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. The Delaware Department of Education also conducts a review.The Specialist Program was most recently reviewed in the spring of 2006 and the Doctoral Program in the fall of 2007, during which they received the highest possible rating ( "A" ratings in all areas, by NASP/NCATE).