NCATE Program Review Process Margaret D. Crutchfield, Ph.D. September 2006

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Writing an NCATE/IRA Program Report
Advertisements

Writing an IRA/NCATE SPA Report. IRA Requirements Programs must have: –Minimum of 24 credit hours of reading/literacy courses aligned with IRA Standards.
Writing Assessment Plans for Secondary Education / Foundations of Educations Department 9 th Annual Assessment Presentation December 3, 2013 Junko Yamamoto.
February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Developing NCATE Assessment Rubrics: Modeling Best Practice For Our Students Pamela Luft Kent State.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education February 2006 image files formats.
PREPARING FOR NCATE May 19, 2008 Teacher Education Retreat.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Teachers Know Their Content And Teach Effectively: CAEP Standard 1 Stevie Chepko,
Office of Professional Preparation and Licensure (OPPL) Annual Report.
The Program Review Process: NCATE and the State of Indiana Richard Frisbie and T. J. Oakes March 8, 2007 (source:NCATE, February 2007)
NCATE Institutional Orientation Session on PROGRAM REVIEW Moving Away from Input- based Programs Toward Performance-based Programs Emerson J. Elliott,
ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS FOR TSPC ACCREDITATION Assessment and Work Sample Conference January 13, 2012 Hilda Rosselli, Western Oregon University.
1 NCATE Standards. 2  Candidate Performance  Candidate Knowledge, Skills, & Dispositions  Assessment System and Unit Evaluation  Unit Capacity Field.
Unit Assessment Plan Weber State University’s Teacher Preparation Program.
Effingham County Who is a Gifted Student? A student who demonstrates a high degree of intellectual and/or creative ability, exhibits an exceptionally.
NCATE Standards 1 & 2 January 2002 Donna M. Gollnick & Antoinette Mitchell.
 Description  The unit has a conceptual framework that defines how our programs prepare candidates to be well-rounded educators. Every course in the.
Department of Physical Sciences School of Science and Technology B.S. in Chemistry Education CIP CODE: PROGRAM CODE: Program Quality Improvement.
Emporia State University Phil Bennett (Some Slides by Dr. Larry Lyman) Teacher Work Sample The Teachers College.
The Department of Educational Administration Assessment Report School of Education and Human Services Carol Godsave, Chair, Assessment Coordinator.
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
COURSE ADDITION CATALOG DESCRIPTION To include credit hours, type of course, term(s) offered, prerequisites and/or restrictions. (75 words maximum.) 4/1/091Course.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Three-Year-Out Review of Assessments (Pending Accreditation Council and CAEP.
Writing Your Program’s SPA Report(s) Cynthia Conn, Ph.D., Associate Director, Office of Academic Assessment Chris Geanious, Project Director, College of.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Standard 3: Candidate quality, recruitment and selectivity Jennifer Carinci,
CONNECT WITH CAEP | Transitioning from NCATE and TEAC to CAEP: How? Patty Garvin, Senior Director,
Streamlined NCATE Visits Donna M. Gollnick Senior Vice President, NCATE 2008 AACTE Annual Meeting.
NCSS/NCATE SPA Review Process. New Program Review Process The report Web-based form Limited pages by section Will be able to access drafts.
EDU 385 Education Assessment in the Classroom
Deconstructing Standard 2c Dr. Mike Mahan Gordon College 1.
February 28, 2008The Teaching Center, Washington University The Teaching Citation Program & Creating a Teaching Portfolio Beth Fisher, Ph.D. Assistant.
NCATE Accreditation: Views from the Field Christopher Cratsley Fitchburg State College Robert A. Cohen East Stroudsburg University.
NCATE STANDARD I REVIEW Hyacinth E. Findlay Carol Dawson Gwendolyn V. King.
 This prepares educators to work in P-12 schools (1)  It provides direction (1)  It is knowledge-based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with.
Oregon State Program Review Process February 10-12, 2010 Commission Meeting.
NCATE Standard 3: Field Experiences & Clinical Practice Monica Y. Minor, NCATE Jeri A. Carroll, BOE Chair Professor, Wichita State University.
TWS Aids for Student Teachers & Interns Overview of TWS.
Preparing to Succeed with the Electronic NCSS/NCATE SPA Review Process Accreditation, Accountability, and Quality An Institutional Orientation and Professional.
EDU 385 CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT Week 1 Introduction and Syllabus.
Using Assessment Data Helen Thumann Department of Education.
NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.
Introduction to the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Presented by Frank H. Osborne, Ph. D. © 2015 EMSE 3123 Math and Science in Education 1.
NCATE Vocabulary Candidates--university/college students
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Sharon M. Livingston, Ph.D. Assistant Professor and Director of Assessment Department of Education LaGrange College LaGrange, GA GaPSC Regional Assessment.
Paris, N.A. (2006) AACTE Session #334 V Conspicuous Excellence: Embracing Accountability, Documenting Impact & Building Trust Nita A. Paris, PhD, Associate.
NCATE STANDARD I STATUS REPORT  Hyacinth E. Findlay  March 1, 2007.
Preparing Your ELCC Assessments for NCATE Accreditation Missouri Professors of Educational Administration Conference October 10, 2008.
Assessment System Overview Center for Education Overview for the NCATE BOE Team April 18-22, 2009.
Continuous Improvement. Focus of the Review: Continuous Improvement The unit will engage in continuous improvement between on-site visits. Submit annual.
Update on Program Review Margie Crutchfield AACTE February, 2009.
Columbus State University C ollege of Education and Health Professions PSC Program Review February 14-17, 2010.
Deciphering SPA Requirements Kathy Hildebrand, Ph.D., Assistant Dean of Assessment & Continuous Improvement, College of Education Cynthia Conn, Ph.D.,
Stetson University welcomes: NCATE Board of Examiners.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Update Stevie Chepko, CAEP Sr. VP for Accreditation.
Incorporating Program Assessment into Your Annual Program Review June 29, 2006.
NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholder to insert your own image. COMMON.
Performance-Based Accreditation
Data Conventions and Analysis: Focus on the CAEP Self-Study
NCATE Unit Standards 1 and 2
Partnership for Practice
Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum
NCATE Standard 3: Field Experiences & Clinical Practice
Donna M. Gollnick Senior Vice President, NCATE April 2008
EDCI Retreat; Aug TJ Oakes Phillip VanFossen
PROGRAM REVIEW AS PART OF THE CAEP ACCREDITATION PROCESS
Program Review Update Webinar
REPORT CARD ON EDUCATOR PREPARATION
SUMMARY OF Teacher Preparation In US
Association of Teacher Educators Jacsksonville, FL. February 18, 2003
Marilyn Eisenwine Committee Chair
Presentation transcript:

NCATE Program Review Process Margaret D. Crutchfield, Ph.D. September 2006

A brief review….  Unit = School, College, or Department of Education plus other entities on campus that prepare school personnel  Program = Specific Discipline Area

UnitProgram StandardsNCATESPA Reviewed byBoard of Examiners Program Reviewers (or state) ProcessOn-siteElectronic DecisionAccreditationRecognition Final Decision- Maker Unit Accreditation Board Audit Team/Program Reviewers

 SPA = Specialized Professional Association

NCATE has standards for the following programs  Early Childhood Education  Educational Communications and Instructional Technology  Educational Computing and Technology  Educational Leadership  Elementary Education (Initial)  English as Second Language Education (Initial)  English Language Arts Education (Initial)  Foreign Languages Education (Initial)  Health Education (Initial)  Mathematics Education (Initial)  Middle School Education  Physical Education  Reading Education  School Library Media  School Psychology  Science Education (Initial)  Social Studies Education (Initial)  Special Education  Technology Education (Initial)

 What about programs accredited by other accrediting bodies (e.g. ASHA, CACREP, etc.)?  What about programs for which NCATE does not have standards and are not accredited by another agency?

How Do Program Reports Fit into the Unit Accreditation Review?  Program recognition reports are important part of evidence for meeting NCATE Standard 1  A unit can be accredited without receiving national recognition for all programs

Purpose of the Program Review  Determine whether or not the program has in place a limited number (6-8) of comprehensive assessments that demonstrate candidate mastery of the SPA standards.  Candidate performance on these assessments is appropriate to demonstrate mastery.  Provide information for unit to use to respond to Unit Standard #1

NCATE Unit Standard 1:  Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school personnel know the content of their fields, demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions and apply them so that students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Required Assessments 1.State licensure exam for program area (if available—otherwise another content based assessment) 2.Content Assessment 3.Assessment of Planning (e.g., unit plan) 4.Student teaching/internship assessment 5.Assessment of candidate impact on student learning or providing a supporting learning environment 6.A 6 th assessment is required, type is optional

Required program assessments Content:  State licensure exam for program area (if available—otherwise another content based assessment)  Content Assessment Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge Skills and Dispositions:  Assessment of Planning (e.g., unit plan)  Student teaching/internship assessment

P – 12 Student Learning:  Assessment of candidate impact on student learning or providing a supporting learning environment Program is required to have at least one more assessment, can have a maximum of 8 to demonstrate candidate mastery of SPA standards

Assessment #1 - Licensure data  State test required for licensure in the content area  80% of completers must meet or exceed the state pass score

Assessment #2: Another content-based assessment  Grades (although this can be tricky)  Comprehensive exam  Content-based portfolio assessment  Case studies; action research

Assessment # 3: Ability to plan Assessment of ability to plan instruction (classroom-based programs)  e.g., unit or lesson plan assignment Assessment of ability to fulfill specified professional roles (advanced programs)  e.g., needs assessment project

Assessment #4: Clinical Practice  Student teacher/internship/practicum evaluation What if it is a unit-wide (not discipline- specific) assessment?

Three effective strategies  SPA-specific addendum  SPA-specific rubrics  Coding assessment AND including information in narrative about context

Assessment #5 : Impact on Student Learning Impact on Student Learning (Initial Teachers)  Teacher work sample or other classroom- based project Ability of Candidate to Provide Supportive Learning Environment (Other School Personnel)  Action research  Employer or other external surveys (ELCC)

Acceptable rubric for Unit Standard #1 expects candidates to Assess student learning Be able to use assessments in instruction Develop meaningful learning experiences for students based on their developmental levels & prior experience.

Candidates can…  judge students’ prior learning,  plan and teach lessons,  assess student learning,  reflect on student learning, and  make adjustments to their teaching to improve learning.

 Must have at least one more assessment (#6) but assessment type is optional unless SPA has SPA- specific requirements  SPA specific information is included in each program report form  Each program can have up to eight assessments

What is “an assessment”?  For the purposes of the program report, an assessment is an evaluated activity or requirement by which a program determines that specific outcomes or standards have been mastered by a candidate.  The assessment “package” consists of the assessment instrument, scoring guide, and candidate data derived from the assessment.

What isn’t an assessment  A syllabus (although it might be used as an assessment instrument for a course grade)  A list of program objectives or expected candidate outcomes  State or professional standards by which a program is designed/assessed

What might the assessment instrument look like? Examples  A sample of a comprehensive test  An evaluation form (student teaching, survey)  A course outline or outlines (if grades are used as the assessment)  A description of the assignment (unit plan, teacher work sample)

What Criteria Are Used to Evaluate Assessments?  Assessments are aligned to standards  Assessments reflect the rigor of standards  Assessments are free from bias  Scoring guides clearly identify levels of proficiency  Data provide evidence of candidate mastery of standards

What about the scoring guide? The scoring guide should:  Include “explicit statements of proficiencies candidates are expected to demonstrate in their responses.”  Be “constructed so that different levels of candidate proficiency are clearly distinguished.”

What isn’t a scoring guide A = Excellent B = Good C = Satisfactory etc. Journal = 10 pts Essay = 50 pts Attendance = 20 pts Final exam = 20 pts

ElemntDoes not meet standard Requires revision Meets standard Exceeds standard Unifying Concepts of Science The goals and objectives of Science Education as identified in the National Science Education Standards are ignored or misunderstood. The goals and objectives of Science Education as identified in the National Science Education Standards are explained but require additional clarity or detail. The goals and objectives of Science Education as identified in the National Science Education Standards are explained and related to curricular decisions. The goals and objectives of Science Education as identified in the National Science Education Standards and other sources are explained and contrasted for planning curricula.

More on Scoring Guides  The assessment/data are only as good as the scoring guide.  If possible, the scoring guide should be specific to the discipline and aligned to the standards.  Scoring guide should be correlated to and appropriate for the assessment.

Presenting Your Data  Data tables should be self-contained documents – readable and user- friendly  Shown the parts of the sum, not (just) the sum of the parts!  Data should be presented by categories used in the scoring guides

What Is Not Useful Data “ Candidate GPA in the math methods course for the past three years is 3.27.” “All of our candidates must score at the proficient level or above on this assessment in order to advance to student teaching.”

Characteristics of Well-Presented Data Title of Assessment / Group assessed * / # in group Assessed Item UnacceptableAcceptableTarget Lesson plan addresses needs of all learners 25%50%25% Penmanship50%25% *Specify academic year or cohort group, e.g. “ ”; “candidates admitted spring 2003” Note: Provide legends for abbreviations, acronyms, etc.

Disaggregate Data for  Different levels of a program (e.g. baccalaureate and Initial Masters)  Different sites at which a complete program is offered  Different cohorts or grading periods

How Much Data for Program Reports?  At least through reports submitted in spring 2007, one semester of data for five assessments  In fall 2007 and spring 2008, one year of data will be required  Fall 2008 and spring 2009, two years of data  Three years of data are optimal – not necessary to provide more

Program review decisions SPA reviewers will make one of the following decisions based on your program report:  The program is nationally recognized.  The program is nationally recognized with conditions. Insufficient data Insufficient alignment Poor assessment, scoring guides, etc 80% rule  The program is not nationally recognized; a new program report may be submitted.

When do you submit reports?  HIGHLY recommend submitting reports 12 months prior to site visit  February 1 or September 15  Can submit up to 2 years prior to visit

What else has changed?  Not required to place key assessments at specific transition points  Do not submit examples of candidate work

Who to Contact at NCATE For questions related to overall process, submission requirements, etc.  Margie Crutchfield,  Jaye Bishop,  Deidre Alves,  Technical problems: Frank Huang,

Resources on NCATE web site  click on Institutions, click on Program Reviews Program Report Forms, Guidelines, Instructions, Examples of Assessments, Examples of Report Sections  click on Program Reviewers All training materials for program reviewers