UNDERSTANDING THE THREE PROGRAM REVIEW OPTIONS

Transcription

UNDERSTANDING THE THREE
PROGRAM REVIEW OPTIONS
SABATA G. MORRIS
Accreditation Associate
Program Review
CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates
CAEP REQUIREMENTS
• All EPPs (Educator Preparation Providers) seeking
CAEP Accreditation must complete program
reviews
• States will define the program review options
available to EPPs as part of the new CAEP State
Partnership Agreement (NOW is the time to
provide input to your state as they define the
options!)
CAEP REQUIREMENTS
• CAEP Accreditation includes two steps:
Step #1: Program Review (up to three options
that are the focus of this session)
Step#2: Accreditation Self-Study (three
pathway choices are Selective Improvement
[SI], Inquiry Brief [IB], or Transformation
Initiative [TI] that each have session/s at this
conference)
Signed CAEP/State Partnership
Agreements
• 16 Partnership Agreements Signed
Alabama
Arkansas
Delaware
Hawaii
Kansas
Louisiana
Michigan
Montana
Nebraska
New Hampshire
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
South Dakota
West Virginia
Wyoming
Selected program review options
State
State Review
Feedback Option
SPA Review
Alabama
X
X
X
Arkansas
X
X
X
Delaware
X
Hawaii
Kansas
X
X
X
X
X
Louisiana
Michigan
X
X
X
Montana
X
X
X
Nebraska
X
X
X
New Hampshire
X
X
X
Ohio
X
X
X
Oklahoma
X
Oregon
X
X
X
South Dakota
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
West Virginia
Wyoming
X
CAEP Program Review Options*
•CAEP Program Review with National
Recognition (“SPA review”)
• Includes Options A, B, C, D, & IL/PB
•CAEP Program Review with Feedback
•State Program Review
* Each state will negotiate a new agreement with CAEP to define
the options for Program Review available to the EPP’s within each
state.
CAEP Review with National Recognition
(SPA)
 CAEP Program Review with National Recognition
• “National Recognition” through review by Specialized
Professional Associations (SPAs)
•
•
•
– Only option that leads to “National Recognition”
– Review is specific to SPA National Standards
-All SPAs must revise standards every seven years using the
CAEP guidelines
-New format – maximum of 7 standards and 28 elements
Timing of Submission: Mid-cycle of the overall accreditation cycle (3
years in advance of the accreditation visit for most states)
Specialty Professional Associations (SPAs)
• ACEI—Association for Childhood Education
International
• ACTFL—American Council on the Teaching of
Foreign Languages
• NAEYC—National Association for the Education
of Young Children
• ALA—American Library Association
• NASP—National Association of School
Psychologists
• NAGC—National Association for Gifted Children
• AMLE-Association of Middle Level Education
(formally NMSA)
• NCSS—National Council for the Social Studies
• CEC—Council for Exceptional Children
• NCTE—National Council of Teachers of English
• ELCC—Educational Leadership Constituent
Council
• NCTM—National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics
• IRA—International Reading Association
• NSTA—National Science Teachers Association
• ISTE—International Society for Technology in
Education
• SHAPE AMERICA-Health & Physical
• TESOL—Teachers of English to Speakers of Other
Languages
CAEP Program Review with
National Recognition-SPA Review
Option A
• Assessment 1: State Licensure Exam
• Assessment 2: Additional Content Assessment
• Assessment 3: Assessment of Candidates’ Ability to Plan
Instruction
• Assessment 4: Assessment of Student Teaching/Internship
Performance
• Assessment 5: Assessment of Candidate Impact on Student
Performance
• Assessment 6: Additional Required Assessment (specified for
some SPAs such as the OPI for ACTFL)
• Assessments 7 & 8: Optional Additional Assessments
National Recognition-SPA Review
Option B: EPP-Defined Assessments
• Maximum of 8 assessments
• Must include state licensure exam data
• Demonstrates content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge
and skills, and candidate impact on student learning
• Reviewed with SPA standards
Option C: Continuing Recognition
• Used by programs previously Nationally Recognized by the SPA using
Option A (in the current assessment-based system since Fall 2004)
• Not an option if the SPA standards have changed since the previous
review
• Reduced documentation; however, current assessment descriptions
and data (at least two administrations of each assessment) must be
included
• Specific instructions on the web site should be thoroughly read before
preparing an Option C report
National Recognition
Option D: Validity & Reliability Study
• Program conducts validity and reliability studies of its
assessments in lieu of other program report evidence
requirements
• Must seek permission from CAEP to pursue Option D in advance
Option IL/PB: Initial Licensure/Post-Bacc
• For “MAT-like” programs for secondary level licensure in all or
some of the five secondary content areas – foreign language
(ACTFL), social studies (NCSS), English (NCTE), mathematics
(NCTM), & science (NSTA)
• Leads to National Recognition by CAEP, not the individual SPAs
• Currently being reviewed by the five SPA Coordinators
Overview of Program Review with
Feedback
• Purpose of Program Review with Feedback
 Provides feedback to the EPP’s, the state and accreditation visitor
team
 Requires one form be completed
• Links to the Institutional report (IR) or Inquiry Brief (IB)
• Reviews disaggregated data from IR or IB by licensure area
• Review is limited to data collected at the EPP level
• Each state contributes questions specific to the licensure area data
for this option
• Timing of Submission: At the same time as the self-study (roughly 8
months in advance of the visit)
What the Program Review with
Feedback Requires?
• Since all data and evidence are disaggregated from the IR
or IB
 No new data or reporting procedures are required
 Data are reviewed in the context of the licensure area
• EPPs will crosswalk (tag) CAEP submitted data to a single
state selected standards
 Does not allow alignment with licensure specific standards
 States can submit specific criteria or standards to be
reviewed as part of the process under component 1.3
Questions to be answered by Reviewers?
• Does the evidence support the EPP’s assertion that
each licensure area meets the selected state
standards?
• Is there evidence that suggest that each licensure
area does not meet the selected standards?
• Reviewers provide feedback to the EPP, the state,
and EPP visitor team based on the answers to the two
questions.
 Reviewers do not make a decision
 States and EPP use the feedback as part of the decision
making process related to accreditation
Who are the reviewers for program
review with feedback?
• CAEP recruits, trains and retains high-quality reviewers
• States will provide reviewers for the Program Review
with Feedback
• Reviewers will have content specific expertise
• Reviewers make professional judgment on the
sufficient of evidence that state standards are met
for each licensure area submitted
• One of the reviewers for each visitor team will be a
program review with feedback specialist or a
reviewer selected by the state staff that specifically
reviews state requirements
State Review
• Each state conducts a program specific review
• Review is at the state level
• State determines the review process and
standards to be used
– Could be state standards
– Could be national program standards
– Could be a combination of the two
• Visitor team have access to the state program
reports
RESOURCES
• Program Review Options
• http://caepnet.org/accreditation/program-review/policies-andguidelines/program-review-options/
• New SPA Assessment Library- coming mid April 2015
• www.caepnet.org
• Programs to be Submitted for SPA Review
• http://caepnet.org/accreditation/program-review/policies-andguidelines/programs-to-be-submitted-for-spa-review/
• Preparing a SPA report
• http://caepnet.org/accreditation/program-review/policies-andguidelines/preparing-a-spa-program-report/
QUESTIONS
Program Review Team
 Stevie Chepko, Senior Vice President, Accreditation
[email protected]
 Banhi Bhattacharya, Senior Director of Program
Review, [email protected]
 Sabata Morris, Accreditation Associate,
[email protected]
 Monica Crouch, Accreditation Associate,
[email protected]

UNDERSTANDING THE THREE PROGRAM REVIEW OPTIONS

Transcription

Similar documents

Making Your Case for Accreditation

Quality of Evidence - CAEP

CAEP Standard 4, Program Impact

CAEP and States: A Collaboration on Accreditation and Approval

Reporting Your Evidence

Partnerships for Practice: CAEP Standard 2 (CAEP 101)

Preparing the Self-Study

Investigating EPP Claims: The CAEP Inquiry Brief (IB) Pathway

CAEP Standard 1 Providing Evidence in the Self

Reliability and Validity:

Optional Early Instrument Evaluation