The IRA/NCATE Program Review Process Chicago, Illinois April 29, 2012

1. The IRA/NCATE Program Review ProcessChicago, Illinois April 29, 2012

2. Frequently Used Terms • Unit = School, College, or Department of Education plus other entities on campus • Program = Specific Discipline Area • Candidate = pre-service teachers • Students = K-12 students • SPA = Specialized Professional Association; there are now 20 organizations that collaborate with NCATE to review programs

3. Institutional Report—submitted by the unit to demonstrate that the unit meets the 6 NCATE Unit standards • Program Report—submitted by programs to demonstrate that the programs meets the NCATE/SPA standards. • Recognition Report—the report you receive back from NCATE and the SPAs

4. Three Routes to Program Approval recognized by NCATE • National Program Review by SPA (i.e. IRA, AMLE, ALA/AASL,TESOL, CEC, ACTFL, etc) • State Program Review • Review by another accrediting body (For example, NASM accreditation of a university’s College of Music)

5. State vs. SPA/National Program Review • Whether institutions submit programs to a SPA (AMLE) or to the state for review depends on the NCATE/State Partnership • Some states require SPA review while some require state review. Others allow the institution to choose.

6. State Partnerships

7. Purpose of Program Review • Determine whether or not the program has in place comprehensive assessments that demonstrate candidate mastery of the IRA standards. • Candidate performance on these assessments is appropriate to demonstrate mastery. • Provide information for unit to use to respond to Unit Standard 1. • National Recognition

8. A Comparison

9. Relationship between Program Review and Unit Review • The program decisions factor into Standard 1, which says: “Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school personnel know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.”

10. Program Review Cycle

11. Program Submission Due Dates

12. Decisions for Programs • Nationally recognized • Nationally recognized with conditions (if this is the decision, the conditions must be specified, and must relate to the standards; programs have 18 months to address conditions) • Further Development Required/Recognized with Probation (program has 12-14 months to submit a revised report) • Not nationally recognized (for programs that have submitted a total of three times and have not managed to move to recognized with conditions or nationally recognized)

13. Options for Program Review

14. Program Review Options • Option A • Option B • Option C • Option D • IL/PB

15. Option A- Current Process • Current process: the program selects 6 to 8 key assessments required of all candidates. • Institution must submit a minimum of six assessments, unless the SPA specifies more than six required assessments • Institution may submit additional assessments when SPA does not specify all eight assessments • Five specific types of assessments are required by all SPAs

16. Required Assessments in National Program Review-Option A • State licensure exam for content • Assessment of content knowledge • Assessment of Planning (e.g., lesson plan or unit plan) • Student teaching/internship assessment • Assessment of candidate impact on student learning or providing a supportive learning environment • Other assessment

17. Option B • Allows institutions to choose all of their own assessments (with some constraints) • No more than 8 assessments. • Must submit state test data-Assessment 1 • Must demonstrate content, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, and impact on student learning • Must have assessment of candidate impact on student learning or for non- teaching programs, candidate impact on providing a supportive learning environment-Assessment 2 • Must meet SPA standards

18. Option C-Continuing Recognition • Designed to reduce the documentation requirements for programs already nationally recognized. • Can be used by programs that were previously nationally recognized using the 6 to 8 key assessment model (started process in Fall 04) and whose standards have not changed since the last submission. • Must submit current data on all assessments. • Focus on Section V—self study and continuous improvement

19. Option D • A program can conduct validity and reliability studies of its assessments in lieu of other program report evidence requirements • Must seek permission from NCATE before pursuing this option

20. IL/PB 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 NCATE, not the individual SPAs Reviewed by SPA Coordinators at this point

21. Guidelines

22. Data Rule • Data Requirements: • Minimum data required is data resulting from two applications of the assessments • For resubmissions (Response to Conditions or Revised Reports), data from one application new/revised assessments is required • A program is eligible to receive National Recognition with Conditions even if there are no data available yet

23. Data Rule For units undergoing accreditation for the first time, programs are expected to be able to include in their program reports at least one year of data on all assessments in order to be eligible for full national recognition. They will be expected to have two years of data at the time of their unit visit. The following question was added to program reports:

24. Enrollment Programs Low-Enrollment Programs: • The option to defer low-enrollment programs (defined as 5 or fewer completers in a program in the last 3 years combined) will continue until we transition into CAEP. • At that time, we will determine if the new option, CAEP Program Review with Feedback, will meet the needs for review of low-enrollment programs. • Programs are NOT required to defer program review due to low enrollment.

25. Timeliness Rates Program reports have been consistently available to institutions on time (Feb. 1 or Aug. 1) for the past 5 years…

26. Recognition Rates Initial Reports: * R = Nationally Recognized; C = Recognized with Conditions

27. Recognition Rates Revised & Response to Conditions Reports: * R = Nationally Recognized; C = Recognized with Conditions

28. www.ncate.org, Accreditation, Program Review Assessment Library 250+ assessments approved by the SPAs Program Report Forms Guidelines, Instructions Examples of Reports Multiple examples of reports fully approved on first submission Archived Web Seminars for Institutions and Program Reviewers Mini-videos on how to use PRS Resources on NCATE web site

29. Moving To CAEP

30. CAEP Information • October 22, 2010 was a historic day for educator preparation. • The NCATE and TEAC governing boards voted unanimously to create a single accrediting body for educator preparation. • CAEP-Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation • NCATE and TEAC will continue, but will begin to merge activities. • It is expected that by January 2013, CAEP will be fully active and NCATE and TEAC will sunset.

31. NCATE Contacts For questions related to overall process, submission requirements, etc. • Monique Lynch, mlynch@ncate.org • Elizabeth Vilky, elizabeth@ncate.org • Sabata Morris, sabata@ncate.org • Danielle Peyton, danielle@ncate.org • Technical problems: Frank Huang, frank@ncate.org Victoria Jones, victoria@ncate.org

32. IRA Contact • For questions related to the standards and what are appropriate assessments: • Diane Kerndkern@reading.org

33. Questions ?