101 May 2005
An accrediting body for schools, colleges, and departments of education recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Commission on Higher Education Accreditation
NCATE’s Constituent Members Teachers Specialized Professional Associations State & Local Policymakers Teacher Education
NCATE GOVERNANCE Executive Board provides overall leadership Unit Accreditation Board (UAB) makes accreditation decisions, writes standards, & oversees Board of Examiners Specialty Area Studies Board (SASB) approves program standards State Partnership Board (SPB) approves state partnerships
State Partnerships
Standards –State Unit & Program Stds –NCATE Unit & Program Stds –Combination State Program Stds NCATE Unit Stds Type of Visit –Joint State & NCATE Visit –Concurrent State & NCATE Visit –NCATE Only Visit
BOE Team Composition for Joint Visits Voting Members –3-8 NCATE Board of Examiners members –2-7 or fewer state representatives Non-voting Members –State consultant from the State Agency –Observers from state affiliates of AFT & NEA
How does the state partnership work in your states?
Annual Report Submit AACTE/NCATE annual report by October 1. –Part A: Contacts & Characteristics –Part B: Data on candidates, faculty, & budget –Part C: Progress on AFIs States may have access to annual report data for its institutions. Some states request supplemental information with Part C.
Team Report NCATE format for the team report State addendum (optional)
Accreditation Decisions by NCATE Accreditation Accreditation with provisions or conditions Accreditation with probation Deny or revoke accreditation
Continuing Accreditation Visit AccreditationConditionalProbation Written Documentation Focused Visit AccreditationRevocation Within 6 months Within 2 years Accreditation Within months Within 2 years Full Visit
First Accreditation Visit AccreditationProvisionalDenial Written Documentation Focused Visit AccreditationRevocation Within 6 months Within 2 years Accreditation Within months
Decisions by States Program Approval (usually for licensure areas) Unit Approval –May be same or different from NCATE
How does your state use the NCATE program review and accreditation decisions in determining state approval?
NCATE Standards
Candidate Performance Candidate Knowledge, Skills, & Dispositions Assessment System and Unit Evaluation Unit Capacity Field Experiences and Clinical Practice Diversity Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development Unit Governance and Resources
Components of Standard The Standard Rubrics Supporting Explanation
Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions Standard 1
The Standard Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.
Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates (Initial and Continuing Preparation of Teachers) UnacceptableAcceptableTarget Teacher candidates have inadequate knowledge of subject matter that they plan to teach as shown by their inability to give examples of important principles or concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Fewer than 80 percent of the unit’s program completers pass the academic content examinations in states that require such examinations for licensure. Teacher candidates know the subject matter that they plan to teach as shown by their ability to explain important principles and concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Eighty percent or more of the unit’s program completers pass the academic content examinations in states that require such examinations for licensure. Teacher candidates have in-depth knowledge of the subject matter that they plan to teach as described in professional, state, and institutional standards. They demonstrate their knowledge through inquiry, critical analysis, and synthesis of the subject. All program completers pass the academic content area examinations in states that require such examinations for licensure.
Dispositions for All Candidates UnacceptableAcceptableTarget Candidates are not familiar with professional dispositions delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. They do not model these dispositions in their work with students, families, and communities. Candidates are familiar with the dispositions expected of professionals. Their work with students, families, and communities reflects the dispositions delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Candidates’ work with students, families, and communities reflects the dispositions expected of professional educators as delineated in standards. Candidates recognize when their own dispositions may need to be adjusted and are able to develop plans to do so.
Supporting Explanation: The public expects that teachers of their children have sufficient knowledge of content to help all students meet standards for P–12 education. The guiding principle of the teaching profession is that student learning is the goal of teaching. NCATE’s Standard 1 reinforces the importance of this goal by requiring that teacher candidates know their content or subject matter, can teach effectively, and can help all students learn. All professional school personnel are expected to carry out their work in ways that are supportive of student learning.
Program Reviews as Evidence of Meeting Standard 1 National Reviews by SPAs (Specialized Professional Associations) State Reviews by the State Agency Responsible for Program Approval
New NCATE Program Review Process
5 Sections 1.6-page Context Statement –Course of Study –Number of completers –Brief information about faculty 2.List of assessments, scoring guides, and data tables being submitted 3.Table aligning assessments to SPA standards
4.Discussion of assessments and data –Content knowledge –Pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions –Effects on student learning 5.3 pages delineating how faculty have used data to improve the program
Data available from national (& sometimes state) program reviews 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.Other assessment to show SPA standards are met
How much data are needed? Between now and through spring 2007 visits: –At least one semester of data for assessments in program reports –At least one year of data for the onsite visit Fall 2007 & Spring 2008: 2 years of data for both Beginning fall 2008, three years of data for both
What have you learned about assessments in the national review of elementary education programs? How are institutions addressing student learning? Where are institutions doing well & falling short? Ron
What candidate assessments do you use in the state program approval process? What are institutions doing well in collecting & using data & what needs improvement? States
Alignment of Program Review with Standard 1 Content Rubric elements 1-2 Professional & Pedagogical Knowledge, Skills, & Dispositions Rubric elements 3-5 P-12 Student Learning Rubric elements 6-7
Use of National Recognition/ State Approval by BOE Teams An area for improvement will be cited for each program that is not nationally recognized or does not have full state approval. UAB may remove AFI if program has been recognized after the BOE visit, but before the UAB meeting.
What unit assessments and data are needed for Standard 1? Outcomes from conceptual framework Dispositions Pedagogical content knowledge Professional knowledge
What responsibility do we (NCATE, state, SPA) have for helping institutions be successful in achieving state/national approval/ recognition of programs and unit accreditation? What are your groups doing?
The Process
2-3 years before visit 3 semesters before visit 1-2 semesters before visit Intent to Seek Accreditation Preconditions Program Reports Due
60 days before visit days before visit Visit Date Institutional Report Due Previsit with Team Chair The On-site Visit
Board of Examiners Teams Teacher Education Teachers Specialty & Policy
Within 52 days after visit March/April & October Within 2 weeks after UAB BOE Report Finished UAB Meeting Notification of Accreditation
For this question, respond as a BOE member. –How can the state consultant be most helpful to the BOE/state team during the visit? –How does the state consultant help make the visit run smoothly?
Organizing to Determine Accreditation Audit Committees 4-5 Members with 6-9 cases Joint Audit Committees 2 Audit Committees Full UAB 32 Members Consent Agenda Recommendations for Denial, Probation, or Revocation
Continuing Accreditation Cycle
Accreditation Decision YEAR 1 Annual Report YEAR 2 Annual Report YEAR 3 Annual Report YEAR 4 Annual Report YEAR 7 Institutional Report & Visit YEAR 6 Annual Report & Program Review Documents YEAR 5 Annual Report Probation 2 years Visit Conditional 2 years Focused Visit
Reminder The second visit for a newly accredited institution is in five years Some states are still on a 5 year cycle
States Moving to 7-Year Review Cycle: 42 Arkansas Arizona California Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Georgia Guam (non-partner) Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland – will move to 7- year cycle after institutions have been accredited under the new MD standards Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada
and more… New Hampshire (non-partner) New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina - will move to a 7-year cycle after institutions have been accredited under the new NC standards North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont (non-partner) Virginia Washington Wisconsin West Virginia Wyoming
States considering the 7-year cycle, but have not received approval from the appropriate board: 1 Florida
States retaining the 5-year cycle: 6 Alabama Colorado Iowa Massachusetts Mississippi Puerto Rico
States that have not responded: 2 Alaska Rhode Island
And Remember Why We Are Doing All of this Work…