1. Option C Reviewer Update
Richard Mainzer Kathlene Shank Rachelle Bruno
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

2. Performance-Based Program Report Options
Option A: Standard Program Report
Option B: Program Faculty Selected Assessments
Option C: Continuing Recognition
Option D: Validity & Reliability Studies
Types of Reports
Initial
Revised
Response to Conditions
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

3. Continuing Recognition Program Report Option C
Available to programs that were recognized using the 6 to 8 key assessment model during their previous review cycle.
This model was first available for programs submitted in Fall 2004 and required for all programs submitted in Spring 2005 and thereafter.
Increased focus on how programs have used data to improve their program (Section V)
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

4. Continuing Recognition Program Report Option C
For programs that meet these criteria, the documentation required for the current review is significantly reduced:
Program faculty must submit data on all assessments.
Program faculty submit assessments and scoring guides/rubrics only for those assessments that are new or substantially changed since the previous submission
Programs respond only to those items in Section I for which there has been substantial change since the pervious submission.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

5. Determining “Substantial’ Change”:
Is the data table for the current assessment inconsistent with the scoring guide submitted in previous review, i.e. if reviewers look at the current data table alongside the scoring guide from the previous review, will the data make sense?
Do the changes in the assessment and scoring guide result in changes to at least 30% of the CEC Preparation Standards selected for this assessment in Section III?
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

6. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Section I
Respond to questions 1 – 3 only if there have been substantial changes in this information since the previous submission
Section II
Should be consistent with previous submission
Section III
Section IV
For each assessment that is new or substantially changed, attach one document that includes the assessment, scoring guide/criteria, data tables and a 2-page maximum narrative.
Submit data tables for all assessments.
Section V
Describe how faculty are using the data from assessments to improve candidate performance and the program, as it relates to content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions; and student learning.
For each assessment listed in Section II, delineate why changes have or have not been made to the assessment and/or scoring guide since the previous submission.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

7. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Reviewing
First, determine whether the overall decision in the prior report was full CEC program recognition and whether there were no required changes in the prior program review report.
If the answer is yes, the report can be reviewed for as an Option C data only.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

8. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Reviewing
Next, determine whether the overall decision in the prior report was full CEC program recognition and whether there are no voluntary changes in alignments and assessments by comparing Charts II and III from the prior Program Report with the current Program Report.
If the answer is yes, the Program Report can be reviewed for data alone.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

9. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Reviewing
If there are required or voluntary significant changes in either assessments or alignments, determine whether the program report has identified these changes as significant, and has included the appropriate narrative and documentation in the current report.
If the answer is yes, the Program Report can be reviewed for both alignments and data.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

10. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Reviewing
If there are significant changes in the assessment or alignments that the Program Report does not identify or does not include the appropriate narrative and documentation determine whether there is sufficient information in the current Program Report to conduct a review of all of the changes.
If the answer is yes, then conduct a full review of ALL required and voluntary significant changes. In the program review report indicate that the current program report did not identify all significant changes, the basis for this determination, and then add the review determinations of the alignments, assessments, and data.
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

11. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Special Note
Option C program reports are based on a prior program report that was recognized without conditions. Some program reports reviewed under an earlier review rubric present a dilemma because CEC had allowed reviewers to determine full program recognition even with changes needed to one or two program assessments. CEC has changed to a clearer program review rubric requiring all CEC Content Standards be met to grant a full program recognition.
In these situations program reviewers will review program report submitted under Option C from the perspective it was developed, i.e. the earlier program report was fully recognized. However, it is collegially important to make the program faculty aware of the context and dilemma. In these situations, the following language is suggested for Part E of the Program Review Report.:
The program faculty in good faith submitted the present report as an Option C and it is from this perspective that CEC reviews the program report. However, faculty should be aware that one or more CEC Content Standards were found to be “not met” in the prior report. If the alignments of the assessments and rubrics to the major elements of the CEC Content Standards were not sufficiently clear and convincing in the prior report, the data in the present report based on those assessments cannot be convincing in establishing that the program candidates are mastering the major elements of the CEC Content Standards.
Based on the implementation of the Option C and its own learning, CEC has modified the program review rubric used when this program report was earlier reviewed. The present program review rubric requires clear and convincing evidence of alignment of program assessments with the major elements of the all the CEC Content Standards as informed by the appropriate specialty set(s).
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.

12. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
Question & Answer
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
12/3/2018

13. © 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.
CEC Contact
Richard W. Mainzer, Ed.D.
Associate Executive Director
CEC Professional Services
1110 North Glebe Rd. Ste 300
Arlington, VA 22201
703/
12/3/2018
© 2013 Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved.