1. Office of Field and Clinical Partnerships and Outreach: Updates
Visiting district offices, schools, program areas, clinical faculty
Partnership Model working group
Advisory Board
New Teacher Evaluation Rubrics
Website
Placements
Certification
Data collection

2. September 29-October 1 Washington, DC
CAEPcon
September 29-October 1
Washington, DC

3. From NCATE to CAEP – Observations, Differences, Opportunities
More autonomy - methodologically
Substantive evidence vs. superficial evidence
Data literacy very important
Advanced standards not finalized

4. The Standards Standard 1 – Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Standard 2 – Clinical Partnerships & Practice
Standard 3 – Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity
Standard 4 – Program Impact
Standard 5 – Quality Assurance Plan & Continuous Improvement

5. Initial vs. Advanced Standard Number of initial Components
Number of Advanced Components 1 5 2 3 6 4

6. CAEP Process & Timeline
EPPs submit a self study report about 8 months before on-site visit. The report is thin on narrative and thick on evidence
Once submitted, the review team will engage in an iterative process of asking questions and seeking clarification. The more questions answered during that time period, the fewer surprises when they come to campus

7. Key Takeaways
With respect to teacher preparation, we are in very good shape (much better than a lot of other school/college/departments)
Dispositions are huge
Need to overhaul our surveys, add in an admissions survey, and align surveys so the data are usable and comparable across all stakeholders

8. Key Takeaways
Standard 4 – Program Impact – What impact do our graduates have on their students – must meet all sub-standards or no accreditation.
Standards 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 – surveys, that are well-aligned and informative, can constitute our evidence
Standard 4.1 is the issue – need actual student learning outcome data.
Can use whatever methodology we want
10% purposeful sample –
We can decide how and why we define purposeful

9. Standard 4: 4.2, 4.3, 4.4
4.2 What evidence (other than measures of P-12 student learning) do I have that would demonstrate inservice graduates are effective teachers?
4.3 What evidence do we have that would demonstrate that employers are satisfied with our program graduates once hired?
4.4 What evidence do we have that would demonstrate our program graduates are satisfied now that they have been hired and are on-the- job?

10. Calling all qualitative methodologists… Standard 4.1
What evidence do we have that would demonstrate graduates’ impact on P-12 student learning? What research methodologies could we feasibly employ to gain such information?
The EPP creates data similar to state data in conjunction with student assessment and teacher evaluations conducted in school districts where some portion of its completers are employed

11. Advanced Programs
If you feel your advanced program should be exempt from CAEP review, must complete form and submit:
Intent of the advanced program is to develop P-12 teachers or other school professionals for employment in P-12 Schools/Districts
Over 50% of the enrollees in the program are teachers or other school professionals in P-12 schools/districts
Ay M.Ed; M.S; M.A.; Ed.D; or Ph.D. Program specific to P-12 schools districts.
Advanced level program that are designed to further the knowledge and skills of P-12 and/or other school professionals such as curriculum and instruction, educational technology, etc.*
Any track, endorsement, or “add on” program

12. Advanced programs GRE may no longer be required for admission
“The CAEP minimum criteria are a college gpa of 3.0 OR a group average performance on nationally normed assessments, or substantially equivalent state-normed or EPP administered assessments of mathematical, verbal, and written achievement in the top 50 percent of those assessed” An EPP may develop and use a valid and reliable substantially equivalent alternative assessment of academic achievement. The 50th percentile standard for writing will be implemented in The CAEP minimum criteria apply to the group average of enrolled candidates whose preparation begins during an academic year.”

13. Advanced Programs, cont.
EDL requires two internships in separate settings. If there is no way to meet this requirement (2.2) CAEP as the rubrics are still in draft form.
Data Literacy important to Advanced Programs.

14. Feedback on Advanced Standards
Advanced Standards still in draft form. Comments can be sent to:

15. Partnerships-Field Experiences
Partnership Model
Co-constructed mutually beneficial relationship
Shared responsibility for students
Diverse settings
Selection of cooperating teachers
Joint curriculum/ professional development (some online)
Technology
Coherence between coursework and practicum/student teaching

16. Data Collection
Reiterate that we are in good shape. We just need to find a way to document our good work. This is one example that was shared. Can also reorganize chart to collect data per course.

17. Quality Assurance System
We are in good shape, we just need to document our system:
State Goals
Document and record evidence
Document how candidates perform over time
Clearly define how effective is effective enough
Stakeholders must participate in the process
Review, readjust, review, readjust, etc.

18. Resources
CAEPcon presentations: