The Minefield of Accreditation Doug Phelps, Head of Park Century School (2013) Sanje Ratnavale, Co-Head of the Cohort School Nat Damon, Assistant Head of John Thomas Dye School January 2013

We 3 are NOT of accreditation

Presentation Who is driving the Quality Debate Granular Analysis iNACOL Public Schools Colleges The landscape Granular Analysis Collaborative Arrangements Grades Suggestions

Public Schools In the past quality was based on Inputs - Teacher Credentialing - Standards/Textbook Selection - Seat Metrics -Time metrics -Some outputs Common Core changing all that -Assessing Learning not summative achievement - Most tests online for all courses (blended, online, class) -Trying to establish accountability

Outcomes Outputs Inputs New Emphasis of Quality Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) “We believe there is a small window of opportunity to pilot within the field of online and blended learning a set of new outcomes-based performance metrics for quality that—once adopted and disseminated—would ultimately forge a path for outcomes-based quality assurance in K-12 education at large”. (iNACOL : “Measuring Quality from Inputs to Outcomes” October 2012”)

BETTER OUTCOMES PARADIGMS? (iNACOL : “Measuring Quality from Inputs to Outcomes”) Building Blocks data on Proficiency- Problem: age, cohort, point in time Graduation rates Problem: enrollment disincentives College/career readiness Problem: no standards Closing the achievement gap Individual student growth Fidelity to Student’s academic goals “Systems of Assessment” Entry data for growth models Adaptive assessments Formative assessments Summative assessments Based on Multiple measures of proficiency and student growth No Age based Cohorts Individual data

Online Learning Issues A College Perspective- UC Boars “Sheer volume of “homegrown” teacher-created online courses” UC Boars “online learning could give students with better access to technology or money to pay for courses an advantage” UC Boars “positive outcomes of online learning have yet to be demonstrated” “the profit motive inherent in many online providers may be at odds with providing sufficient staffing” “ authenticity of who is submitting key assignments is not always evident” Source: Presentation by Monica Lin at CLRN conference

Online Learning Issues A College Perspective- UC Boars + if “Definition of online entities are not always clear-cut” UC Boars, what do you do? Online Course Accredit Shifting the focus from UC “approving providers” to UC approving courses UC system Accredit Online Provider

CLRN ensuring quality online delivery FROM UC Presentation The appropriate experts are reviewing online courses: CLRN ensuring quality online delivery UC ensuring quality “a-g” content

Review of Online Courses (effective 2013-14) Assess the online course against the iNACOL Standards for Quality Online Courses and CA content standards Submit online course to CLRN for review* STEP 1 CLRN-certified OR Self-assessed Conduct subject-specific review against UC faculty’s content criteria Submit online course to UC for “a-g” review STEP 2 Approve course for “a-g”? YES Add course to online publisher’s or online school’s “a-g” course list; approval expires in 3 years *If not eligible for CLRN review, the online course must be self-assessed by the online publisher or school.

Step #1A: CLRN Certification Online course publishers serving public institutions Public online schools

Step #1B: Self-Assessment Effective for: Online course publishers serving only private institutions Private online schools Any online courses not aligned with state standards 2014-15 school year: Non-online high schools, districts, and programs Institution conducts self-assessment against iNACOL Standards for Quality Online Courses Self-assessment will be incorporated into the course submission process for UC “a-g” review

What questions arise from Colleges and the Public School actions? Will there be more Clearing Houses around the country? “State would set up an online course clearinghouse” (iNACOL: Measuring Quality from Inputs to Outputs” P 23) Are schools becoming less accreditable/credible in their online offerings? What do independent school accreditation organizations think?

The “Quality” Standards/ Accreditation Universe Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS NAIS 1400 members Non-Profits only No consortia K-12 NAIS Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies CAIS,AISNE etc Independent Schools

The “Quality” Standards/ Accreditation Universe Fully Online Schools Charters, Stanford LS,K12 Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS iNACOL 3800+members with mostly public schools for K-12 NAIS 1400 members Non-Profits only No consortia K-12 NAIS Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies CAIS,AISNE etc Public Schools Independent Schools

The “Quality” Standards/ Accreditation Universe Fully Online Schools Charters, Stanford LS,K12 Colleges Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS Clearing Houses CLRN,NCAA Other states? iNACOL 3800+members with mostly public schools for K-12 NAIS 1400 members Non-Profits only No consortia K-12 NAIS Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies CAIS,AISNE etc Public Schools Independent Schools

The “Quality” Standards/ Accreditation Universe Council on Higher Education Moocs Fully Online Schools Charters, Stanford LS,K12 Colleges Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS Clearing Houses CLRN,NCAA Other states? iNACOL 3800+members with mostly public schools for K-12 NAIS 1400 members Non-Profits only No consortia K-12 NAIS Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies CAIS,AISNE etc Public Schools Independent Schools

The “Quality” Standards/ Accreditation Universe Fully Online Schools Charters, Stanford LS,K12 Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS Supplemental Protocols Learning Service Providers Extensions iNACOL 3800+members with mostly public schools for K-12 Where do Consortia go? Accreditation organizations with flexible protocols Public Schools

Important Other Questions Ubiquitously acceptable, should we just go with the iNACOL standards? - input - “standards” like NAIS - student population - missions - accountability Should we jump on the public school railroad?

At this stage it looks like… Outcomes, NOT inputs or even Outputs= “Quality Control” Not “Quality Assurance”= IS mindset World of Data- ready or not? Quality Control Quality Assurance

NAIS Task Force Recommendation Task Force, September 2011 “Schools should consider colleges and universities, for-profit and non-profit organizations, charter schools, and other entities as both potential partners and competitors in this market”.

Partnership with a consortium or a separated program or provider Independent School (Member School) Online Course Provider (Partner Institution) Need for Oversight re: Alignment

Who developed the curriculum? Who are the teachers? How are they evaluated? How do they grade? Who developed the curriculum?

Independent Schools Mores Standards Population Pedagogical Approach Learning and Teaching Styles Faculty Composition Geographical Location Etc. Etc. Etc. . . .

Collaborations Raise Important Questions At JTD, Blended ¼ High School Spanish 1 for 5th Graders Not done for 20 years Schedule time required Need 180 minutes per week No Spanish teacher in current faculty Major demand What kind of partnership? Which provider/content? Who would hire/train the teacher? Who would manage the teacher? Who would evaluate pacing and progress? Who would evaluate the teacher? How would we manage the grade? How would we fit it in?

Collaborative Arrangements Degree of Equivalence In all cases = Substantive Change Degree of burden dependent on partner accreditation Same regional body prior notification Equivalent D. of E. body Prior approval Self-certification Non Equivalent body Prospectus

None of our Partners have equivalent accreditation! Council on Higher Education Moocs Fully Online Schools Charters, Stanford LS,K12 Colleges Federally Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies Serving Colleges and Schools WASC,MASC,NEASC,SACS Supplemental Protocols Learning Service Providers Extensions Clearing Houses CLRN,NCAA Other states? iNACOL 3800+members with mostly public schools for K-12 NAIS 1400 members Non-Profits only No consortia K-12 NAIS Approved Regional Accreditation Agencies CAIS,AISNE etc Public Schools Independent Schools

SACS/COC states that: “…institutions describe collaborative academic arrangements in many different ways, most commonly identifying them as dual or joint educational programs, affiliations, partnerships, consortial agreements, and other similar terms.”

SACS/COC States “Because the SACS/COC accreditation that has been awarded to a Member (accredited) institution, it is not transferrable to a Partner institution – either in actuality or appearance – SACS/COC reserves the right to prohibit the use of its accreditation to authenticate credit courses or programs offered with organizations not so accredited. Member institutions are responsible for ensuring the integrity of their accreditation and of their education programs when entering into collaborative academic arrangements.”

SACS/COC 1. Conformity with Core Standards. Collaborative Arrangements Ensuring the Quality of the Credits Recorded on Transcripts. SACS/COC 1. Conformity with Core Standards. 2. Effective Assessment and monitoring by academically-qualified persons. 3. Disclosure to constituencies and Transparency 4. Agreement on Teaching Methodologies 5. Equivalent Quality of Teaching Qualifications 6. Processes for assessing Educational outcomes 8. Joint accountability of faculty

Collaborative Arrangements Ensuring the Quality of the Credits Recorded on Transcripts. Taking a grade as your own “it must be able to demonstrate that the instruction was accomplished under the Member’s own supervision and included approval of the academic qualifications of each instructor in advance and the regular evaluation of the effectiveness of each instructor. The Member institution’s approach might include the joint appointment of instructors.”

As Independent Schools : Adapt 21st century learning models Blended, flipped, supplemental learning Maintain accountability channels that ensure school culture / identity Reassurance to independent schools is established under an accrediting organization

PNAIS (Pacific Northwest Association of Independent Schools) a. Describe the use of online education and/or distance education at the school. Be specific regarding program development, scope, and number of students involved. Describe how/why these decisions regarding distance education were made. b. How does the school’s mission inform the development of the online education and/or distance education program? c. How are these courses congruent with the school’s beliefs about how students learn? d. What is the relationship between the online/distance education program and the overall school program and school culture? e. How does the school assess and evaluate the effectiveness and impact of online education and/or distance education at the school?

PNAIS (Pacific Northwest Association of Independent Schools) Physical Location or Place Top educational opportunities and experiences for elementary and secondary children are grounded in teacher-student interactions. To this end, we expect schools to have a campus where students are able tofrequently and meaningfully interact with adults and peers.

What do our accrediting agencies need to do? Fill Vacuum More resources- Our Own Standards? Feeder Expertise for all Regional Associations like iNACOL or NAIS sponsored or new entity Look at more flexibility in “school models” that can be accredited Collaborative arrangements Extensions Consortia