320 likes | 594 Views
CAEP Transition: Facts, Questions, and Answers…. Presenters: Deborah Eldridge, CAEP Senior Vice President for Accreditation and Administration Mark LaCelle-Peterson, CAEP Senior Vice President for Engagement, Research and Development Shari Francis, NCATE Vice President for State Relations
E N D
CAEP Transition:Facts, Questions, and Answers… Presenters: Deborah Eldridge, CAEP Senior Vice President for Accreditation and Administration Mark LaCelle-Peterson, CAEP Senior Vice President for Engagement, Research and Development Shari Francis, NCATE Vice President for State Relations Elizabeth Vilky, CAEP Director of Program Reviews
Overview of the Presentation • Part I: Where is CAEP today? • Overview of CAEP Commission on Standards and Performance Reporting, alignments, and transition timeline • Part II: CAEP Accreditation Processes • Update on Continuous Improvement (CI), Transformation Initiative (TI) and Inquiry Brief (IB) pathways • Part III: State Partnerships • Part IV: Program Review Options • Part V: Miscellany • Update on Part C Annual Reports, Status of CHEA recognition
Part I:Where is CAEP today?Overview of CAEP Commission on Standards and Performance Reporting, alignments, and transition timeline
Overview of CAEP standards • CAEP Commission on Standards and Performance Reporting • 41 Commissioners convened in May 2012 • 5 working groups established: • Content and Pedagogical Knowledge • Clinical Practice and Partnerships • Quality/Selectivity of Candidates • Capacity, Quality and Continuous Improvement • Accreditation, Public Accountability, and Transparency • Draft standards to be released for public comment in early 2013
Current CAEP Standards • Candidates demonstrate knowledge… • Data drive decisions… • Resources support learning… • Harmonization of Standards and Principles • Adopted as equivalent to predecessors • Basis for CAEP’s accreditation decisions
Alignments • NCATE Standards and TEAC Quality Principles are aligned with the initial CAEP standards • Final draft of new standards will be released in late 2013 with alignment tables for guidance
CAEP timeline • Non-accreditation functions are currently consolidated (AIMS, staffing, applications, billing, etc.) • Draft Standards released for public comment in early 2013 • Final standards released in late 2013 • 2 year transition period through 2015 • Institutions can choose to come up for accreditation under NCATE standards, TEAC quality principles, CAEP standards, or both NCATE/CAEP or TEAC/CAEP • Spring 2016 is the earliest when CAEP standards will be required (date of self-study submission)
Part II CAEP Accreditation Process: Theme and Variations Update on Continuous Improvement (CI), Transformation Initiative (TI) and Inquiry Brief (IB) pathways
Pathways to Meeting Standards • Evidence in self-study must show that the EPP meets all CAEP Standards • Self-study format selected to emphasize: • Research on learning: Inquiry Brief (IB) • Documentation of performance: Continuous improvement (CI) • Research on program features: Transformation Initiative (TI)
Inquiry Brief (IB) • Focus: Faculty investigation of (a) candidate performance; (b) quality of evidence; (c) use of evidence for program improvement • Emphasis: Meeting ‘research-level standard’ in the quality of evidence & candidate performance • Accreditation Decision: Based on meeting all CAEP standards with recognition of research-level quality of the evidence presented
Continuous Improvement (CI) • Focus: Continuous improvement of programs and practices of an educator preparation provider (EPP) • Emphasis: Moving to target-level performance on standard(s) selected by the EPP • Accreditation Decision: Based on meeting all CAEP standards at the adequate level with recognition of target performance
Transformation Initiative (TI) • Focus: A broad-based initiative to transform an educator preparation provider’s teacher education programs and practices to serve as a model • Emphasis: Research-centered to inform the profession about best practices and what works • Accreditation Decision: Based on meeting all CAEP standards with recognition of TI research and innovations
CAEP Accreditation Process Steps in the CAEP accreditation process: • Eligibility of Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) • No longer the NCATE “unit” or the TEAC “program” • Self-study of EPP completed & evaluated through • Formative Feedback and Offsite Review • Public Input (call-for-comment & third-party survey) • Onsite Visit with Subsequent Report (and response) • Decision by CAEP Accreditation Council • Annual Reports submitted and monitored
PART III CAEP State Partnerships
State Partnership Options • Member Partners • CAEP and Authority/Authorities for Educator Preparation (State DoE, State Standards Board, Board of Regents and/or Higher Education Commission) • Teams • CAEP, Joint CAEP & State, Concurrent CAEP & State • Program review • CAEP Review (leads to national recognition) • CAEP Review with feedback • State Review • One Institutional Report • Optional minimal state addendum
CAEP State Partnerships • Pilot testing in 2012 Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon, & Utah • Benefits include: • Eliminates duplication of effort • Saves time and money • Access to the Accreditation Information Management System (AIMS): AIMS password and access to state institutions • Information for use in program approval/renewal • Participation in professional development (PD), including Spring CAEP Clinic, web training, and expense-only PD • Priorityon stakeholder input and buy-in • Professional dev. credit for participating teachers • Input from AACTE State Chapters
PART IV CAEP Program Review Options
CAEP Requirements • All EPPs seeking CAEP Accreditation must complete program review • States will define the program review options available to institutions as part of the new CAEP State Partnership Agreement
CAEP Program Review with National Recognition Overview Format: Program report forms completed for each program area and level (i.e. Undergraduate Secondary Biology, Reading Specialist Masters, etc.) describing evidence of candidates' performance on a set of key assessments that demonstrates meeting standards Standards: Specialty Professional Association (SPA) standards Timing of Submission: Mid-cycle of the overall accreditation cycle (3 years in advance of the accreditation visit for most states) Reviewers: SPA review teams trained by both the SPAs and CAEP Results: Recognition Report with a decision of "Nationally Recognized," "Recognized with Conditions," or "Further Development Required/Recognized with Probation/Not Nationally Recognized" Comment: This is the only option that can lead to national recognition by CAEP/SPAs
CAEP Program Review with National Recognition 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
CAEP Program Review with National Recognition Option B: Institution-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
CAEP Program Review with 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
CAEP Program Review with Feedback Overview Format: Program report forms completed with links to information found in the IB or IR documents for three clusters of programs - secondary content area programs, cross-grade programs, and other school personnel programs Standards: State-selected standards Timing of Submission: At the same time as the IB or IR (roughly 8-12 months in advance of the visit) Reviewers: Review teams by cluster trained by CAEP and including reviewers identified by the state, NEA/AFT, NBPTS, AACTE/ATE, and/or other sources Results: Feedback useful for program improvement and determination of state program approval
State Program Review Overview Format: State-defined process Standards: State-selected standards Reviewers: State review team Results: State decision regarding program approval Comment: The state process and standards will be reviewed by CAEP when the state wishes to NOT include a requirement for national review. States may request a review of state standards by SPAs to determine how closely aligned the state standards are to the SPA standards. States may also apply for authorization to award national recognition as a result of the state process, in which case the standards and program review processes would be reviewed by both CAEP and the SPAs.
PART V MISCELLANY Update on Part C Annual Reports, Status of CHEA recognition
Status of Recognition • Status of 501(c)3 : Achieved! • Status of CHEA recognition: In progress • NCATE and TEAC are piloting accreditation review with initial CAEP standards in Fall 2012 • Inquiry Brief; Continuous Improvement; Transformation Initiative pathways are all piloting with NCATE/CAEP standards or TEAC/CAEP quality principles
CAEP Information www.caepsite.org