First Advisor

Sheldon Loman

Date of Publication

Spring 6-5-2018

Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) in Educational Leadership: Special and Counselor Education


Special Education




Special education teachers -- Training of -- Evaluation, Teachers -- Training of -- Evaluation, Distance education -- Evaluation, Children with visual disabilities -- Study and teaching, Disability studies



Physical Description

1 online resource (ix, 228 pages)


The primary question for this dissertation was: Does online professional development increase novice itinerant Teachers of Students with Visual impairments' (TVI) efficacy for assessing learning and literacy media for students with multiple disabilities including visual impairments? The literature suggested novice TVIs might experience low efficacy when implementing strategies unique to their job after leaving teacher-training programs. Working in an itinerant position can intensify perceptions of low efficacy. One area of low efficacy was conducting and reporting on the assessment of learning and literacy media (ALLM).

Using a quasi-experimental pre/post-design, data were collected from pre/postintervention knowledge questionnaires about the assessment process and pre/postintervention written ALLM reports. Eleven participants with 1-5 years of experience as TVIs were divided into control and intervention groups. Four online modules were delivered to the intervention group. The data were analyzed using two dependent and two independent sample t tests. The results indicated the change scores between the control groups pre- and post-submissions did not improve. The change scores between the intervention groups pre- and post-submissions did significantly improve after participation in the online modules. The change scores overall between the intervention and control groups' pre/post submissions were statistically significant. The intervention group completed an acceptability rating scale regarding the feasibility of the modules and the results had an average score of 3.5 (4 = strongly agree). The primary limitation of this study was the small sample size and, therefore, did not allow for generalization.


In Copyright. URI: This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).

Persistent Identifier