Performance-Based Accreditation NCATE Performance-Based Accreditation

NCATE Recognized by U.S. Dept. of Ed. as an accrediting body for SCDE’s Scope includes programs that prepare teachers and other professional personnel for work in elementary and secondary schools NCATE accredits the unit, not individual programs

NCATE’s Member Organizations State & Local Policymakers Teacher Education Specialized Professional Associations Teachers

NCATE = 30+ Ed. Associations NCATE constituents are divided into 4 quadrants: Teacher education (AACTE) Teachers (NEA/AFT) State and Local Policy Makers (CCSSO, NSBA, NASBE, State standards boards) Specialized Professional Organizations (NCTM, NCTE,NCSS, NSTA)

NCATE’s Mission Accountability Improvement

Accreditation Voluntary On-going (Initial and Continuing) Peer review Public High stakes

Accreditation Process Self-study by Institution Program Review Process using appropriate program standards (where applicable) On-site visit by BOE team using Unit Standards Accreditation decision by Unit Accreditation Board

Program Review Process Programs need to be reviewed by experts NCATE has different relationships with states to ensure that this done Some states require a program review by NCATE and some conduct the review themselves Programs reviews happen before or during the visit BOE members will review the reports on programs provided by NCATE or by the state.

NCATE Unit Standards 1. Candidate skills, knowledge and dispositions 2. Assessment system and unit evaluation 3. Field experiences and clinical practice 4. Diversity 5. Faculty qualifications, performance, and development 6. Unit governance and resources

What does performance-based accreditation mean? Performance-based accreditation means accreditation based on results, results that demonstrate that candidates know the subject matter and can teach effectively so that all students learn.

Institutional Reports The Institutional Report for First-time (100 pages) and Continuing Accreditation (50 pages) Overview of the unit, including descriptions of programs A separate response for each of the six standards Responses to all standards shall address each element of the standard Data tables required by NCATE & others identified by the institution

IR Outline Overview (2 sections, 3 pages, 2 tables) Conceptual Framework (2 sections, 3 pages) Standard 1 (7 sections, 12 pages, 2 table) Standard 2 (3 sections, 6 pages, 1 table) Standard 3 (3 sections, 6 pages, 1 table) Standard 4 (4 sections, 6 pages, 3 tables) Standard 5 (6 sections, 6 pages, 0 tables) Standard 6 (5 sections, 4 pages, 0 tables)

IR: Standard 1a 1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates If the state has a licensure test for content, what is the overall pass rate? What programs do not have an 80% or above pass rate? ADD TABLE

IR: Standard 1a (cont.) What other key assessments provide the unit information about candidates’ content knowledge as expected in professional, state, and institutional standards? What do the data indicate about the candidates’ knowledge? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed such as master’s programs for licensed teachers.)

IR: Standard 1a (cont.) What do follow-up surveys of graduates and employers indicate about graduates’ preparation in the content area? (A table summarizing the results related to content knowledge could be included here.)

Option for each standard in the IR What does your unit do particularly well related to Standard 1? What research related to Standard 1 is being conducted by the unit?

Who’s on the on-site team? All NCATE team No state team Joint team NCATE team and state team work together Concurrent team NCATE team and state team work separately Also present State representative NEA/AFT representative

Board of Examiners Teams Teacher Education Specialty & Policy Teachers

Each BOE team includes at least one: Teacher educator Teacher Representative from other constituent groups On joint visits, teams also include State BOE members

BOE Activities while On-Site The team will examine the data generated by the unit’s assessment system and review other evidence supplied by the unit. conduct individual and group interviews. determine if the Standards are met. write the BOE Report

BOE Activities while On-Site BOE will use the rubrics associated with the standards to make judgments about the extent to which the unit is meeting the standards. Use of the rubrics will: identify areas in which the judgments of team members differ alert team of needed additional data gathering activities; and focus discussion as BOE deliberates on its findings

The Exhibit Room should include: Internal and external evidence being collected that demonstrates that the unit is meeting the standards, including state test scores, employer and graduates surveys, assessments of F.E.

The Exhibit Room should include: Evidence that is clearly labeled and keyed to the standards and elements Evidence from external and internal sources that is currently being collected Assessment evidence that is presented in summary form Evidence that demonstrates that previously cited areas for improvement have been met

Types of Evidence Standard 1 Standard 2 Summaries of candidate assessments Summaries of candidate work Results of state assessments Program reviews and program review docs. Standard 2 Conceptual Framework Assessment system or assessment system plans Sample candidate assessments Unit evaluations

Types of Evidence Standard 3 Standard 4 Descriptions of field experiences Faculty evaluations of candidates Summary results of candidate assessments Candidate work samples Standard 4 Components of curriculum that address diversity Assessments of proficiencies related to diversity Evaluations of policies and practices related to diversity

Types of Evidence Standard 5 Standard 6 Samples of faculty publications Faculty qualifications Faculty development Faculty evaluations Standard 6 Unit budget, with provisions for technology Lists of facilities, including computer labs and curriculum resource centers Summaries of faculty workload Prof.dev. expenditures

BOE Report An overview of the unit A brief review of the conceptual framework, using the Structural Elements outlined in the standards as a guide For each standard: Findings of the BOE team (this includes a discussion of the evidence presented and reviewed) A statement of areas for improvement and the supporting rationale for the areas for improvement

BOE Report (con’t) A list of previously cited weaknesses/areas for improvement and whether they were adequately addressed or are no longer valid under the new standards A BOE Recommendation as to whether the standard is met A list of evidence that was reviewed and all persons interviewed

Accreditation Decisions Continuing Institutions Continuing Accreditation Accreditation with Conditions Accreditation with Probation First-time Institutions Accreditation Provisional Accreditation Denial of Accreditation

Continuing Accreditation Visit Conditional Probation Within 2 years Within 6 months Within 18 months Full Visit Written Documentation Focused Visit Within 12 months Accreditation Accreditation Revocation

NCATE timeline leading up to visit by the BOE team: 2 years prior - continuing institutions receive accreditation folder explaining accred. process and status of programs 12 months prior (February 1 or September 15) - Continuing institutions submit program review documents, according to state partnership agreement 12 months prior – institutions submit Date Preference Form

6-3 months prior - Third party testimony 2 months prior – Institutions submit Institutional Report (includes status report on programs) Institutions host previsit by team chair Visit - BOE members review institution, including using NCATE/state agency reports as evidence for Standard 1

NCATE timeline after the visit by the BOE team: 35 days after visit- BOE Chairs submit draft reports to NCATE; revisions occur, and NCATE sends final reports to institutions about three weeks later 1 month after receiving report - Institution submits rejoinder April/March or Sept./Oct.- UAB Acts Within 14 days after UAB meeting - NCATE sends Action Letter

What are the big questions? Is this unit preparing quality candidates who can be effective educators? How do we know?

The objectives of this three-day session include: Reviewing evidence Conducting interviews Writing the BOE Report Understanding the accreditation decisions Understanding Conceptual Frameworks Interpreting the NCATE standards