May 1 1 Teacher Education Accreditation Council One Dupont Circle, Suite 320 Washington DC

May 1, 09 2 Overall TEAC Goal Public assurance that the program’s graduates are - competent Public assurance that the faculty monitors and improves program quality - qualified - caring

May Assurance based on evidence Upon what evidence does the program faculty rely – to support their claims that the program’s graduates are competent? – to convince themselves that their assessments are reliable and valid? – to convince themselves that program changes & requirements improve the program’s quality?

May What would be bad news? What change in evidence would be taken as real, not just a public relations problem? Downturns in -- – Student satisfaction with the program – Grades – License test results – Employer satisfaction, hiring rates – What? (New developments in scholarship)

May 1, 09 5 Generally available indicators of program quality Grades (major, pedagogy, & clinical) Scores on Standardized tests (candidates’ entrance, exit, and license scores and perhaps graduates’ own students’ scores) Surveys – students, alumni, employers Ratings – portfolios, work samples, cases Basis for Rates – hiring/tenure, gain scores, certification, graduate study, professional awards, publications, NBPTS, etc.

May 1, 09 6 Criteria for TEAC Candidate Status 0.1 Regional accreditation (or equivalent) 0.2 Graduates’ eligibility for a professional license 0.3 Commitment to comply with TEAC's standards 0.4 Disclosure of accreditation status 0.5 Willingness to provide information to TEAC 0.6 Payment of annual indexed fees

May Answer to Key Question 1 1.0Evidence of Candidate Acquisition of 1.1 Subject Matter Knowledge 1.2 Pedagogical Knowledge 1.3 Caring & Effective Teaching Skill 1.4 Each includes evidence of three cross- cutting themes & evidence of validity – Learning how to learn (critical reflection) – Multicultural perspectives & accuracy – Technology – Valid interpretations of the assessment evidence

May 1, 09 8 Answer to Key Question Faculty Learning, Inquiry, & Quality Control 2.1 Rationale for the assessments showing how they are expected to be valid and the faculty’s pass/fail criterion for each 2.2 A record that some program faculty’s decisions are based on inquiry into program requirements and student learning 2.3 Demonstration of a functioning quality control and monitoring system that yields valid evidence, influences policies & decision-making and promotes inquiry

May 1, 09 9 An argument that the program has the capacity for quality The Quality Control System monitors & investigates the capacity of the faculty, curriculum, students, facilities, resources, etc. for quality Parity on common program features with other units at the institution Sufficiency on unique features of the program (clinical, curriculum resources)

May 1, Faculty Learning What has the faculty learned about – 1. Whether its quality control system works as designed 2. The validity of its assessments 3. The results of its assessments 4. The results of its inquiry into what factors influence candidate learning 5. The need for further inquiry

May 1, Evaluation of the Inquiry Brief Formative evaluation (optional) Ready for audit Audit of accuracy and trustworthiness Panel: preponderance of evidence is consistent with claims and meets standards of evidence Committee: record warrants accreditation

May 1, Anatomy of an Inquiry Brief An Inquiry Brief is a Research article or monograph (50 pages) Scholarly work Persuasive case of the program’s claims New standard for accreditation self-study

May 1, Inquiry Brief: main sections 1. Introduction 2. Claims and rationale for assessments 3. Methods of assessing 4. Results 5. Discussion of results and plan of inquiry 6. References

May Inquiry Brief: Appendices A. Internal audit of quality control system – it works as designed and makes things better B. Evidence of capacity and commitment C. Qualifications of the program faculty D. Program requirements & alignments with state and/or professional association standards E. Inventory: analysis of available measures F. Copies of locally developed assessments G. Programs accredited by other agencies

May 1, Three Tests for a Single Program with Multiple License Options Program structure. Essentially the same requirements, rationale, logic, and faculty Quality control system. Options share the same quality control system Evidence. The evidence for the options can be aggregated honestly

October TEAC accreditation process at a glance Application & Candidate status Formative evaluation (optional) Inquiry Brief submitted and declared auditable Call-for-comment Audit visit and Audit Report Analysis of the case by panelists & staff Accreditation Panel recommendation Accreditation Committee decision Acceptance or appeal of the decision Annual Report (Appendix A or E and data update)