Overview of CAEP Guidelines 2014 CAEP –Conference Nashville, TN March 26-28, 2014 Presenters: Mark LaCelle-Peterson, CAEP Hilda R. Tompkins, CAEP, Emerson Elliott, CAEP CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Dra. Canny Bellido, Coordinadora CAEP-UPRM Capacitación CAEP UPRM Rincón PR, Mayo 2, 2014 Dra. Canny Bellido, Coordinadora CAEP-UPRM Capacitación CAEP UPRM Rincón PR, Mayo 2, 2014

Resources CAEP Posted resources to support Educators Preparation Programs (EPPs) in their work: CAEP Evidence Guide CAEP Phase-in Schedule GuidetotheContinuous Improvement (CI) Pathway CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Glossary InTASC: Model Core Teaching Standards CAEP Standards (approved 2013)

CONNECT WITHCAEP | w Phase-inSchedule for EvidenceUnder2013 CAEPStandards in in EPP Report EPP Selects Prior or New CAEP Standards New CAEP Standards Required for All Accreditation Self-Studies, Reviews, and Decisions If your next accreditation self-study is submitted in calendar year → GENERAL PHASE-IN POLICY Some topics in the CAEP standards require new kinds of evidence. For example: Candidate assessment literacy (Standard 1); Partnerships with mutual decision making (Standard 2); Recruitment of academically able and diverse candidates (Standard 3); Functioning Quality Assurance System (Standard 5) Self-study documents submitted through 2017 may include plans Plans + progress Plans + progress Fully in place Fully in place Fully place For CAEP-accredited EPPs, annual reports show progress plan Progress, data if possible Progress, data if possible Prog ress in EPP Annual Progress Annual

Phase-in Schedule for Evidence Under 2013CAEPStandards(Continued) TopTopTopTopTopTopTopTopTopTop PERTAINS TO: Admitted candidate group average performance on nationally normed CONNECT WITH CAEP | | | Twitter: EPP Selects New CAEP Standards Prior or Required for All Accreditation New CAEP Self-Studies, Reviews, and Standards Decisions 2.STANDARD 3 PHASE-IN OF PERFORMANCE ON A NATIONALLY NORMED ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT/ ABILITY 50% 50% 40% 40% 33% achievement/ ability assessments EXAMPLES: SAT, ACT, GRE Alternative criteria can be used, validated apply apply apply apply apply apply apply through investigation

CONNECT WITH CAEP | www. |org Phase-in Schedule for Evidence Under 2013CAEPStandards(Continued) EPP Selects Prior or New CAEP Standards New CAEP Standards Required for All Accreditation Self-Studies, Reviews, and Decisions In 2014, CAEP is collecting data on completion, licensure and employment (consistent with Title II and/or PEDS). Also, EPP reporting is optional for 4 of the 8 measures. Jan. CAEP Other 2014 EPP reporting request describes but does not collect available or planned data, to inform 2015 and later CAEP EPP annual reporting requests. Jan CAEP request Jan CAEP request Jan CAEP request Jan CAEP request Jan CAEP request Jan. CAEP request

Continuous Improvement (CI) Guide CI Self-study format starts with evidence. Five evidence questions are addressed: 1) 2) or 3) What is this item of evidence? How was the quality of the evidence determined assured? What criteria of success have been establishedon the measure, and how? 4) What does the reported evidence mean? 5) How is the evidence used to support improvement? CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Continuous Improvement (CI) Guide Continuous improvement plan:  Regular and systematic performance assessment against EPPs goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, tests innovations and the effects of selection criteria on subsequent progress and completion, and uses results to improve program elements and processes(Standard 5.3) Measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision-making related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction (Standard 5.4).  CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Inquiry Brief (IB) Guide Characteristics of the Inquiry Brief (IB) pathway: Research Emphasis quality of monograph as framework for self-study on quality of data and on improving the the evidentiary base —see 5 data questions on previous slide! Operationalization of CAEP Standards in terms of local claims about completer competence Focus on use of evidence in decision-making and program improvement (in terms of effectiveness, impact, efficiency, etc.) for CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Inquiry Brief (IB) Guide Characteristics of the Inquiry Brief (IB) pathway (cont.): Scrutiny of the EPP’s Quality Control Internal Audit System throughanan Specification of the system, Probing to verify effectiveness, Under CAEP Standards, enhanced attention to — Clinical partnerships and practice (Standard 2) — Candidate quality, recruitment, and selectivity (Standard 3) CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Transformation Initiative (TI) Guide Distinctive characteristics of the Transformation Initiative (TI) accreditation pathway which is a Research and Development (R&D) approach to accreditation include: Guidance on preparation of the TI proposal Continuous improvement plan:  Regular and systematic performance assessment against EPPs goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, tests innovations and the effects of selection criteria on subsequent progress and completion, and uses results to improve program elements and processes(Standard 5.3) Measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision-making related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction (Standard 5.4).  CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

CAEP has congruent responsibilities A. Using data:  Enhance and fully develop evidence-informed accreditation procedures Provide guidelines for EPPs on development and use of data for preparation and accreditation Provide reports for the public about accreditation and about accredited programs Document and analyze the consequences of CAEP’s standards and accreditation practices and use data to improve them Pilot processes, such as the “exemplary level” accreditation and use results to revise procedures Use results from TI accreditation and IES and other research studies to update and strengthen CAEP standards      CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Program Review Process A program review process consistent with the state partnership agreement must be completed as part of the self-study process; timing and process vary according to program review option and accreditation pathway selected. CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

And the most important question for continuous improvement.... How have you used the data to makemodifications in your program modifications? andthentrackedtheresultsofthose CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Sources CAEP Standards, CAEP Evidence Guide WASC 2013 Handbook and evidence guide: reditation-2013 and Baldrige criteria: Carnegie: NICs_bryk-yeager.pdf CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Overview of InTASC CONNECT WITH CAEP | |

Key Changes from the 1992 Standards to 2011 Developmental Continuum: Standards no longer just for beginning teachers but ALL teachers. –INTASC becomes InTASC (Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support) A Focus on 21st Century Knowledge and Skills: Problem solving, curiosity, creativity, innovation, communication, interpersonal skills, the ability to synthesize across disciplines, global literacy, ethics, and technological expertise. Personalized Learning for Diverse Learners: Teachers need knowledge and skills to customize learning for learners with a range of individual differences.

Increased Emphasis on Assessment Literacy: Teachers need to have greater knowledge and skill around how to develop a range of assessments and how to use assessment data to improve instruction and support learner success. A Collaborative Professional Culture: Teaching is no longer a private act. New Leadership Roles for Teachers and Administrators: A shift in leadership from teachers working autonomously in their classrooms to administrators, teachers, and others sharing leadership roles and responsibilities for student learning. Key Changes from the 1992 Standards to 2011

The Learner and Learning Standard #1: Learner Development Standard #2: Learning Differences Standard #3: Learning Environments Content Knowledge Standard #4: Content Knowledge Standard #5: Application of Content Groupings of Standards

Instructional Practice Standard #6: Assessment Standard #7: Planning for Instruction Standard #8: Instructional Strategies Professional Responsibility Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration

For each and every standard Performance Critical Dispositions Standards 1 to 10 Essential Knowledge

Are you hungry? Lunch sponsored by: