Special Education SB488 Certification

 

1. General Information

1.1 Institution Name

California Polytechnic State University

1.2 Dean or Director of Teacher Education

Chance Hoellwarth, Ph.D., Director

choellwa@calpoly.edu | 805-756-1503

1.3. Primary Literacy Contact

Ann Glazer, M.A., Assessment and Accreditation Analyst

aglaze01@calpoly.edu | 805-756-1503

1.4 Credential Program Addressed

Preliminary Multiple Subject Program

1.5 Pathways to the Credential

Preliminary Multiple Subject Program: Student teaching traditional

1.6 Affirmation by the Director of the School of Education

Signed Affirmation Statement

2. Overview of Courses for Literacy Instruction and Process for Program Revisions

Cal Poly’s Multiple Subject program is offered through the School of Education (SOE). All Multiple Subject preliminary credential candidates complete the program as post-baccalaureates who are enrolled in the SOE.

Candidates in the Multiple Subject Credential Program come mainly from a Bachelor of Science in Liberal Studies major that is housed in the Cal Poly Bailey College of Science and Mathematics. The balance of Multiple Subject candidates enter the program as post-baccalaureates after completing other undergraduate degrees.

2.1 

table of all required courses for each pathway where literacy instruction is the focus

Special Education: Mild/Moderate Support Needs Student Teaching Traditional Program
List of all required courses where the primary focus is literacy instruction List of any other courses where literacy standard 7 and TPE 7 are covered

EDUC 427: Theories, Methods, and Assessment of First and Second Language Acquisition in Schools

 EDUC 470-02: Barriers and Accessiblity in Special Education
EDUC 546: Reading and Language Arts Instruction for Special Education SPED 547: Science and Social Studies Methods for Students with Disabilities
  EDUC 550: Assessment Strategies for Special Education

 

2.2 

briefly describe the process used to review the program to ensure alignment with the new literacy instruction standard and teaching performance expectation. Note who was involved in this effort.

The new standard and teaching performance expectation were formally introduced at an Educator Preparation (EdPrep) Committee meeting in October 2023. The EdPrep Committee is comprised of all the faculty and staff associated with the preliminary teaching credential programs, along with the faculty and staff associated with the M.A. in Curriculum and Instruction program. At that EdPrep meeting, one member from each of the preliminary credential programs (multiple subject, single subject, and special education) agreed to serve as literacy leads for their programs and, along with the Clinical Practice Coordinator, formed a literacy committee, co-chaired by School of Education faculty member and CSU Center for the Advancement of Reading and Writing (CAR/W) Co-Director, Tanya Flushman, Ph.D., and the Assessment & Accreditation Analyst.

In November 2023, the committee began reviewing the new literacy instruction standard and teaching performance expectation. With the guidance of Dr. Flushman, and using tools developed by the CAR/W team and adapted for local use, each program engaged in an audit of their program’s curriculum and alignment with both the new standard and the new TPE.

Evidence:

 

2.3 

Describe how the program has ensured that faculty teaching the literacy instruction courses understand the requirements in SB488, the new standard and TPE, and the evidence base supporting them.

The faculty comprising the literacy committee are the faculty who have sole and/or primary responsibility for literacy instruction in each of the preliminary teaching credential programs; therefore, established disciplinary expertise supported understanding the requirements in SB488, the new standard and TPE, and the evidence supporting them. Specifically, through deep engagement with the primary source materials of the new standard and TPE, the faculty teaching literacy instruction courses were able to understand the new requirements. The literacy committee members shared these resources, along with CAR/W- and locally-developed resources with the other literacy faculty in their programs.

2.4 

Describe how the institution/program has provided opportunities for faculty teaching these courses to engage in professional learning to ensure that they are prepared to teach new content as required by SB488, the standards, and the performance expectations. If none has been provided to date, provide information about the implementation plan for specific professional development and learning that will take place.

The literacy committee was comprised of the faculty who have sole and/or primary responsibility for literacy instruction in each of the preliminary teaching credential programs; thus, while disciplinary expertise ensured preparation to teach the new content required by SB488, the time spent with the committee and with the relevant PSAs enabled comprehensive understanding of the specific requirements in SB488, as well as the new standard and TPE. 

Additionally, literacy committee members and faculty from each program attended selected sessions from a series of targeted professional learning opportunities that focused on the learning modules created by the UC/CSU Collaborative for Neuroscience, Diversity and Learning. Attendance at these sessions complemented the efforts completed while enacting the CTC dyslexia grant obtained by the School of Education. 

2.5 

What steps has the program taken or will take in the coming months to communicate to mentor/cooperating teachers and other PK-12 partners the new requirements of SB488, the new literacy instruction program standard, TPE, and upcoming performance assessment requirement?

The SOE took a two-pronged approach to communicating with mentor/cooperating teachers and other PK-12 partners: To communicate the new requirements to district partners, Cal Poly issued an addendum to the current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). To communicate the new requirements to Cal Poly’s mentor/cooperating teachers, the SOE leveraged the existing newsletter to cooperating teachers and included a notice there.

Evidence:

2.6

In what ways did the program’s process for reviewing its coursework and clinical practice requirements against the new standards and TPEs include individuals with expertise in literacy instruction for multilingual/English learner students?

The program engaged in a highly collaborative approach to reviewing its coursework and clinical practice requirements. While the literacy committee itself is comprised of faculty with expertise in literacy instruction for multilingual/English learner students, additional key faculty with this expertise were included as both reviewers of and contributors to the matrices (Table 3.1, 4.1, 5.1).  

2.7

Provide links to syllabi that demonstrate that the English Language Arts (ELA) and Literacy Standards, English Language Development (ELD) Standards, and English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) Framework are required and central components for candidates in literacy instruction coursework. These links should be bookmarked to the exact place in the syllabi where this occurs.

 

3. Preparing Candidates to Understand and Teach Foundational Skills

3.1 Program/Coursework Coverage of TPE

Table 3.1 Course Coverage of Foundational Skills (TPE 7.5)

indicate in which courses:
1) the literacy concepts are introduced and are covered primarily
2) there are opportunities for candidates to practice the concepts
3) the candidates' knowledge of the pedagogical skills related to these concepts are assessed

for each cell below, indicate course number and title with direct link to actual places in the syllabi where these can be seen explicitly.

Special Education Table 3.1 Program/Course Coverage of Teaching Performance Expectations: Foundational Skills

3.2 Coursework Coverage of Standard 7

Provide a narrative with links embedded to specific locations in course syllabi addressing Standard 7a describing how the program prepares candidates to teach foundational skills and the coverage of the above knowledge and skills (TPE 7.5), as specified in the excerpt from the Education Code.

Table 3.1 has narrative elements embedded (with links); additional context below.

The program offers coursework and supervised field experiences that include evidence-based means of teaching foundational skills to all students as a part of a comprehensive literacy program with special emphasis in transitional kindergarten through grade three. Candidates receive the bulk of their training while taking EDUC 546: Reading and Language Arts Instruction in Special Education. As a component of this course, students develop and teach three ELA lesson plans in their clinical practice placements. Lesson 1 requires them to assess a student who needs support in foundational reading. Candidates analyze assessment data and identify instructional targets. They develop an explicit and systematic lesson plan, and teach their lesson to first their peers and then the target student. They receive detailed feedback about this plan from their peers and course instructor. Content related to foundational reading is provided in Weeks 1 – 5. Candidates also complete a UFLI project in which they practice teaching foundational reading activities from the University of Florida’s Literacy Institute to their peers each week.

Nature of Instruction: Candidates learn the connections among the foundational skills, language, and cognitive skills that support students as they learn to read and write increasingly complex disciplinary texts with comprehension and effective expression. Foundational skills instruction is structured and organized as well as direct, systematic, and explicit. Building on prior learning about language development (from EDUC 470-02: Access and Barriers in Special Education), including supporting students who are emergent bilingual (EDUC 427: Theories, Methods, and Assessment of First and Second Language Acquisition), candidates learn the core elements of effective foundational reading instruction in EDUC 546. Week 1 includes instruction on the ELA standards, general curriculum access, and instructional alignment. Content also includes barriers to learning literacy, related to language and cognition. To prepare for class, candidates read a chapter from Carnine et al.’s seminal book, Direct Instruction Reading (6th ed). Ch. 2 is an introduction to the science of reading. In Week 2, students receive an in-class lecture on direct, explicit, and systematic instruction and the science of reading. This lecture includes discussion of Dyslexia, principles of reading instruction, working memory and cognitive load, and a comprehensive overview of Direct Instruction (and direct instruction). The end of class includes hands on practice with DI curriculum, including Reading Mastery, Language for Learning, and Corrective Reading.

Writing & Foundational Skills: Accordingly, the program teaches candidates to provide explicit instruction that is age and developmentally appropriate in letter formation/printing in conjunction with applicable foundational skills and to help children /students apply their encoding skills in comprehensive writing instruction. Week 3 introduces foundational skills, including print concepts and phonological and phonemic awareness. The content includes developmental language disorders and specific learning disabilities including dyslexia. Candidates read Ch. 6 of Carnine et al, Phonemic Awareness and Alphabetic Understanding. In Week 6, candidates learn about encoding/spelling instruction, including the developmental stages of encoding and strategies for teaching spelling.

Foundational skills and English Learners: The program teaches candidates to plan foundational skills instruction based on the needs of students who are learning two or more languages at once particularly by incorporating students’ previous literacy experiences in their home languages and to differentiate instruction using guidance from the ELA/ELD Framework, including knowledge of cross-language transfer between the home languages and English. Candidates complete a self-study of the ELA/ELD Standards and Framework across Weeks 2 and 3. These materials provide a comprehensive exploration of the Standards and how to support students who are emergent bilingual. Candidates plan for the particular needs of students who are emergent bilingual when developing their lesson plans for their Reading Portfolio by selecting appropriate ELD standards and planning individualized supports. Finally, they read and discuss Ch. 11 (Correa & Miller, 2014) from the Handbook of Effective Inclusive Schools. This chapter is titled: What is high quality instruction for English language learners in inclusive schools?

Assessment and Early Intervention: The program teaches candidates that effective instruction in foundational skills employs early intervention strategies informed by ongoing measures of student progress and diagnostic techniques and includes tiered support in inclusive settings for students with reading, writing, or other literacy difficulties and disabilities, including students at risk for or with dyslexia. Candidates read about curriculum based measurement in reading from The ABCs of CBM (2nd ed) by Hosp et al (2016). They also read and use the CORE reading assessment book, and they learn about many CBMs, including DIBELS 8th edition, during class time. They practice administering CBMs to each other and interpreting the data during Week 5. They administer CBMs and interpret data to design targeted intensive reading instruction for the lessons in their reading portfolio. In Week 3, candidates read Ch. 9 from the California Dyslexia Guidelines, the chapter on screening and assessment. In Week 6, candidates analyze student case study data to complete an error analysis letter-sound combinations and word types. Assessment is included in each core topic of EDUC 546 (e.g., how to assess foundational skills, how to asses fluency, how to asses prosody, how to asses multisyllabic word reading, how to assess writing).

The program provides supervised, guided practice that allows candidates to implement comprehensive literacy instruction, including initial or supplemental foundational skills instruction at beginning levels of reading (i.e., before children have typically developed fluency in decoding). Candidates practice teaching reading during each class session, outside of class, and during multiple class projects and assignments. They practice foundational reading instruction weekly as part of the UFLI project. They design and teach a foundational reading lesson in their clinical practice placement. They have in-class skills checks as well as video skills checks (e.g., proper phoneme production). Students practice writing decodable text, they practice using commercial curricula for students with disabilities (e.g., Early Literacy Skills Builder, Early Reading Skills Builder, Benchmark Phonics).

3.3 Clinical Practice: Ensuring Opportunities for Candidates to Practice Teaching Foundational Skills

Provide direct links to evidence demonstrating how the program provides opportunities for candidates to practice teaching students foundational reading skills. The standards require that candidates are provided opportunities to practice foundational reading skills that are appropriate for the children and/or students they are teaching in their clinical practice experience. This does not mean that candidates must practice or be observed teaching every individual foundational reading skill in their clinical practice setting (see PSA 24-08). 

  • 3.3a - Communication/Agreement with Districts regarding clinical practice – Direct link(s) to locations in sample MOU(s) with LEAs or other documentation provided to districts outlining opportunities that must be provided to candidates in clinical practice settings (appropriate setting, information about expectations made available to administrators and mentors at the school site, etc.). This documentation must include information for mentor/cooperating teachers about the expectations for candidates to take and pass a Commission approved literacy performance assessment that includes a focus on foundational literacy skills and the additional cross cutting themes in literacy.

  • 3.3b - Candidate Information – Direct link(s) to location(s) in candidate handbooks or materials explaining the new standard, TPE, and performance assessment requirements demonstrating that candidates have been provided accurate and timely information about what is required during clinical practice related to foundational skills.

  • 3.3c - Candidate Clinical Practice Opportunities – Direct link(s) to locations in any clinical practice observation tools/assessments, if available, that document where candidates are practicing teaching these foundational reading skills to students and are being provided formative feedback to guide improvement.

    Evidence:

 

4. Program Inclusion of Literature, Language, and Comprehension

4.1 Program/Coursework Coverage of TPE

Table 4.1 Course Coverage of Literature, Language, and Comprehension, along with a balance of oral and written language (TPE sub-elements 7.6, 7.7, and 7.8)

indicate in which courses:
1) the literacy concepts are introduced and are covered primarily
2) there are opportunities for candidates to practice the concepts
3) the candidates' knowledge of the pedagogical skills related to these concepts are assessed

for each cell below, indicate course number and title with direct link to actual places in the syllabi where these can be seen explicitly.

4.2 Clinical Practice: Ensuring Opportunities for Candidates to Practice a Strong Literature, Language, and Comprehension Component with a Balance of Oral and Written Language

Provide links to evidence demonstrating how the program ensures that candidates are in clinical practice settings that allow them opportunities to practice TPEs related to oral and written language, as applicable to the credential program.

  • 4.2a - Communication/Agreement with Districts – Direct link(s) to specific location(s) in sample MOU(s) with LEAs or other documentation provided to districts outlining opportunities that must be provided to candidates in clinical practice settings (e.g., appropriate setting, information about expectations made available to administrators and mentors at the school site) related to the TPE sub-elements related to oral and written language including 7.6, 7.7, and 7.8, as appropriate.

  • 4.2b - Candidate Information – Direct link(s) to specific locations in candidate handbooks or other materials explaining the new standard, TPE, and performance assessment requirements demonstrating that candidates have been provided accurate and timely information about what is required during clinical practice related to the TPE sub-elements listed in 4.1.

  • 4.2c - Candidate Clinical Practice Opportunities – Direct link(s) to specific location(s) in clinical practice observation tools that ensure candidates are practicing teaching these skills and are provided formative feedback to guide improvement.

    Evidence:

5. Ensuring Candidates Are Prepared in Diagnostic and Early Intervention Techniques

5.1 Program/Coursework Coverage of TPE

Table 5.1, which includes specific TPE sub-elements related to ongoing diagnostic techniques that inform teaching and assessment as well as early intervention techniques

indicate in which courses:
1) the literacy concepts are introduced and are covered primarily
2) there are opportunities for candidates to practice the concepts
3) the candidates' knowledge of the pedagogical skills related to these concepts are assessed

for each cell below, indicate course number and title with direct link to actual places in the syllabi where these concepts/competencies can be seen explicitly.

5.2 Clinical Practice: Opportunities for Candidates to Learn about Diagnostic Techniques that Inform Teaching and Assessment and Early Intervention Techniques

  • 5.2a - Direct link to location(s) in sample MOU(s) or other documentation provided to LEAs that include explicit reference to efforts that will be made to provide candidates with opportunities, as practicable, during their clinical practice to learn about, and where possible, observe, how schools/teachers are using screening and diagnostic techniques to inform teaching and assessment and early intervention techniques, as appropriate to the credential and as identified in the TPEs and standard.

  • 5.2b - Links to specific location(s) in candidate handbooks or materials that describe for candidates what is expected of them with respect to learning about diagnostic techniques as well as early intervention techniques.

  • 5.2c - Links to specific evidence showing how candidates are provided opportunities to learn about and, where possible, observe how schools/teachers are using screening and diagnostic techniques to inform teaching and assessment and early intervention techniques, as appropriate to the credential and as identified in the TPE and standard.

    Evidence
    • 5.2a - Addendum to Current MOU
    • 5.2a - Draft of 2025-2028 MOU
    • 5.2b - Information Sheet for Candidates
    • 5.2c - EDUC 546 Reading and Language Arts Instruction in Special Education: CBM activity (worksheet, slide 2 and 45). In these activities, students first complete a worksheet to demonstrate an understanding of the intricate administration procedures of early reading CBMs. Next, during the workshop time following the lecture, students practice administering, scoring, and interpreting the ORF, MAZE, LSF, and WIF; additionally, the dyslexia warm-up activity completed at the beginning of class (syllabus, slide 3) provides students with a chance to practice identifying which screening tools and CBMs to use to support students with dyslexia.

5.3 Incorporation of California Dyslexia Guidelines

  • 5.3a -  Coursework – Explain how the California Dyslexia Guidelines are incorporated into the program for all candidates. (300 words or less).

    The California Dyslexia Guidelines are incorporated in the program in both EDUC 546 and EDUC 550. In EDUC 546, candidates read Ch. 9: Screening and Assessment for Dyslexia and watch the webinar Dyslexia 101 by Dr. Holy Lane from the University of Florida’s Literacy Institute. Characteristics of Dyslexia are included in the Week 3 and Week 10 content. In EDUC 550, the Week 5 lecture topic includes “Screening for Characteristics of Dyslexia.” The content in Ch. 11 of the California Dyslexia Guidelines, effective approaches for teaching students with dyslexia, aligns with the course content and focus of EDUC 546. This course is dedicated to teaching evidence-based practices for teaching reading to students with mild to moderate disabilities. The framework used for this instruction teaches systematic, explicit, and multisensory approaches to teaching reading.

  • 5.3b - Coursework – Provide direct link(s) to specific location(s) in course syllabi where the content of the California Dyslexia Guidelines is clearly identified.

    Evidence

  • 5.3c - Clinical Practice - Explain how the program provides, to the extent practicable, opportunities for candidates in clinical practice settings to observe and practice the concepts and strategies included in the California Dyslexia Guidelines. Given that not every candidate will have a child with dyslexia in their clinical practice setting, describe steps taken to provide other opportunities for these candidates to practice strategies identified in the California Dyslexia Guidelines. 

    Most candidates have ample practice of the concepts and strategies included in the California Dyslexia Guidelines because they often have students with dyslexia or other specific disabilities in reading in their clinical practice classrooms. When candidates do not have access to students with dyslexia or specific reading disabilities, their EDUC 546 course instructor assigns them an alternate placement with students who need foundational reading instruction to complete course projects. Candidates develop three lesson plans as part of their Reading Portfolio. They assess students in clinical practice, design lessons, teach the lessons, and analyze their data to make instructional decisions. The lessons all require explicit instruction in reading, including foundational reading, advanced word reading, and comprehension.

  • 5.3d - Communication/Agreement with Districts – Direct link(s) to sample MOU(s) or other documentation describing expectations for clinical practice settings related to providing, to the extent practicable, opportunities for candidates in clinical practice settings to observe and practice the concepts and strategies included in the California Dyslexia Guidelines.

    Evidence

  • 5.3e - Candidate Information – Direct link(s) to location(s) in candidate handbooks or other candidate material that explains the program expectations around the California Dyslexia Guidelines.

    Evidence

  • 5.3f - Provide direct links to specific evidence showing how candidates are provided opportunities to learn about and, where possible, observe how schools/teachers use the skills described in California Dyslexia Guidelines.

     
  • Evidence
 

Related Content

DEI in the Bailey College

Learn More

School of Education
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
805.756.2126
soe@calpoly.edu