CAEP Orientation: Newcomers CAEP PRESENTER: Richard Rice, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CAEP Orientation: Newcomers CAEP PRESENTER: Richard Rice, Accreditation Associate Washington, District of Columbia September 2017

What will be covered in the next 90 minutes? Point 1 — CAEP Resources Point 2 — Accreditation Process Fall 2017 | Washington, D.C. 2

CAEP Resources • CAEP Website: caepnet.org • Accreditation Information Management System (AIMS): aims.caepnet.org Fall 2017 | Washington, D.C. 3

CAEP ACCREDITATION PROCESS • The CAEP Accreditation process is a uniform process for accreditation focused on accountability and continuous improvement. This process is rigorous and high quality, fair, clearly communicated, applied consistently, and managed by a CAEP team of knowledgeable and effective staff. 4

CAEP Accreditation Process 5

CAEP APPLICATION PROCESS  EPPs with NCATE or TEAC accreditation that are in “good standing” are considered CAEP eligible and do NOT have to apply to CAEP.  EPPs new to accreditation or that have lapsed accreditation must apply to CAEP. The Part 1 and Part 2 Applications are now available.

CAEP APPLICATION: PART 1  Contact and leadership information Proposed first visit semester  Number of Completers  Indication of Regional Accreditation status/Financial capacity  Agreement to commit to CAEP accreditation  Signatures of institutional and EPP leadership  Receive AIMS access and an invoice!  EPPs must complete the application process and schedule a site visit within three  years of submitting Part 1  Results in:  Applicant status

CAEP Application: PART 2 The Characteristics and Capacity Tables  Provides context  Provides overview of capacity to operate programs  Allows for the selection of program review option(s) Readiness Self-Assessment Checklist  Allows EPPs to assess their readiness to address the CAEP standards  Results in: • CAEP eligible status – EPP is ready to engage in CAEP accreditation • EPP sets site visit semester and date (date must be set at least 18 months prior to visit)

CAEP Standards for Initial Programs  2013: CAEP Standards for Initial Licensure Programs released:  Scope:  Initial Programs are defined by CAEP as programs at the baccalaureate or post- baccalaureate levels leading to initial licensure, certification, or endorsement that are designed to develop P-12 teachers. All programs offered by the EPP that fall within CAEP’s scope must be submitted in a single self -study report that addresses CAEP Standards for Initial Licensure Programs. First-time licensure areas beyond teaching that are limited to advanced level degrees for other school professionals, such as reading specialists, are addressed in the section that follows [advanced scope].

CAEP Standards for Advanced Programs  2016: CAEP Standards for Advanced Programs released:  Scope:  Advanced Level Programs are defined by CAEP as educator preparation programs at the post baccalaureate or graduate levels leading to licensure, certification, or endorsement. Advanced Level Programs are designed to develop P-12 teachers who have already completed an initial preparation program, currently licensed administrators, other certificated (or similar state language) school professionals for employment in P-12 schools/districts. These programs are submitted to CAEP using the CAEP Standards for Advanced Level Programs. For an EPP with advanced level programs only, or both initial and advanced level programs, a single self-study report is submitted for review.

Program Review • All EPPs seeking CAEP Accreditation must complete the program review process. • Program review is part of the overall accreditation process and occurs either prior (SPA) to or during (Program review with Feedback/State Review) the self-study report and accreditation site visit. • EPPs use the results of program review as evidence of meeting CAEP standards. • States with CAEP agreements determine which program review option can be selected by the EPP:  SPA review with national recognition  State Program Review  CAEP Program Review with Feedback

Program Review 1. CAEP Program Review with National Recognition Specialized Professional Association (SPA) Standards  SPA review teams trained by both the SPAs & CAEP  2. CAEP Program Review with Feedback INTASC (Initial) or NBPTS (Advanced)  State-selected standards if specified on CAEP-State agreement  Reviewed by site visitors (currently under revision)  3. State Program Review State-selected standards  State review team 

3 rd Party Comments • The EPP is required to solicit third party comment on its qualifications for accreditation as part of the accreditation review process.  Provide evidence within 7 days • Website link/newspaper scan/email • Not less than sixteen (16) weeks prior to the scheduled date of a site visit • CAEP accepts written comments from stakeholders up to six (6) weeks before the site visit and provides these comments to the EPP. The EPP can respond to any written comments received prior to the scheduled site visit. The response must be received by CAEP no less than two (2) weeks prior to the site visit.

Self-Study Report & Self-Study Evidence • Self-study report and evidence room are opened 18 months prior to a site visit • Due 9 months prior to a site visit:  Capacity Elements  Narrative  Evidence

Formative Feedback Report • Written by the site team in response to self-study report:  No less than 5 months before site visit • Site team responds to EPP narrative and evidence • Site team can request clarification or additional evidence • Site team creates tasks for the EPP

Self-study report addendum • Written by EPP in response to formative feedback report  EPP provides clarification or additional evidence in response to site team’s writing • EPP has 60 days to complete

Pre-visit (virtual visit) • EPP and lead site visitor will meet to: • Seek clarification • Develop visit schedule • Request interviews

Site Visit and Onsite Evidence Room • The site team will/can:  Examine evidence cited in the self-study report  Conduct interviews  Conduct other investigations into cited evidence • Onsite evidence room • Exit interview

Site Visit Report • Site team writes response to the tasks completed during the site visit and analyzes evidence reviewed onsite • The site visit report contains any recommendations for AFIs and/or stipulations, but the site team does not make recommendations on met/unmet standards • Site visit report is submitted to EPP no later than 30 days after site visit for factual corrections

Factual Corrections • Limited to details  Numbers, names, locations, programs • Lead site visitor incorporates questions and finalizes report

Rejoinder • EPP’s response to the site visit report  EPP can signify agreement or disagreement with findings and write rationale, but cannot provide evidence in the rejoinder

Lead response to rejoinder • Lead site visitor (with assistance from team) responds to rejoinder  Can agree or disagree with EPP’s rejoinder • All documents go to the accreditation council

Accreditation Council • Initial Panel  15-20 minute period where EPP, state, and lead site visitor can join in-person or virtually for clarification questions • Joint Panel • Full Council • Panel makes recommendations on standards and affirms, modifies, or removes recommended areas for improvement and/or stipulations

Accreditation Decisions • Initial Accreditation Decisions  Accreditation for 7 years  Provisional accreditation  Accreditation with stipulations  Denial • Continuing Accreditation Decisions  Accreditation for 7 years  Probationary accreditation  Revocation

Announcement of Decision • EPP and state notified no later than 30 days after council • Accreditation Action Report and Accreditation Letter are sent digitally and physically • CAEP updates website to reflect decisions are physical letters are sent • Appeals Process follows separate policies for announcement

EPP Annual Report • Due every year • Lessened reporting requirements when site visit and EPP Annual Report are in same semester (spring) or site visit is in previous semester (fall) • Purpose is to encourage accurate data in AIMS and to engage EPPs in continuous improvement between cycles Fall 2017 | Washington, D.C.

Questions? • Email: richard.rice@caepnet.org Fall 2017 | Washington, D.C.