1. NCATE 2000 Update April 2000 © 1997-2000, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. All rights reserved.

2. Comparison of Current and NCATE 2000 Standards

3. 20 6 6

4. Performance Assessment zCurrent System yCategory I: xI.A, xI.C, xI.D, and xI.E yCategory II: xII.A, xII.C, and xII.D z NCATE 2000 yStandard 1 xContent knowledge. xProfessional & pedagogical knowledge, skills, & dispositions. xPositive effect on student learning. xCandidate assessment. yStandard 2 xAssessment System. xUse of data to evaluate & improve programs.

5. Unit Capacity Standards zCurrent Standards yI.H Field Experiences & I.I Prof. Community yDiversity in I.A, I.C, I.D, I.E, I.G, I.H, II.B, III.A, & III.B yCategory 3 Standards yCategory 4 Standards z NCATE 2000 Standards yStd 3 - Field Experiences & Clinical Practice yStd 4 - Diversity yStd 5 - Faculty Perfor- mance & Development yStd 6 - Unit Governance & Resources

6. NCATE 2000 Standards

7. Conceptual Framework The conceptual framework(s) establishes the shared vision for a unit’s efforts in preparing educators to work effectively in P-12 schools. It provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, scholarship, service, and unit account- ability. The conceptual framework(s) is knowledge- based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with the unit and/or institutional mission, and continuously evaluated.

8. Conceptual Framework zUnits will be expected to describe their conceptual frameworks in an early section of the institutional report to provide an important context for the unit’s approach to meeting the standards. zUnits’ conceptual frameworks will be submitted with preconditions in the future.

9. Organization of Revised Standards zThe Standard zRubric zExplanation of the Standard including a rationale for the standard

10. CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

11. 1. Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other profes- sional 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.

12. Institutional Standards Institutional standards are derived from the unit’s conceptual framework.

13. 2. Assessment System and Unit Evaluation zThe unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on the qualifications of applicants, the performance of candidates and graduates, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs.

14. External resources for measuring proficiencies zState licensure exams zEmployer evaluations zNational and/or state program reviews zMultiple choice tests & written essays zTranscripts

15. Internal resources for measuring proficiencies zCandidate work yLesson plans yReflections yAssessments used by the candidate zObservations yObservations/videos yParent communications ySurveys yProfessional activities  Student outcomes - Work - Feedback - Scores

16. Features of Good Assessment Systems zEmbedded in instruction zOn-going zData related to standards zMultiple/linked measures zCandidate experiences zBenchmarks zComprehensive

17. 3. Field Experiences and Clinical Practice The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical practice so that teacher candidates and other school personnel develop and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn.

18. 4. Diversity The unit designs, implements, and evaluates curriculum and experiences for candidates to acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. These experiences include working with diverse higher education and school faculty, diverse candidates, and diverse and exceptional students in P- 12 schools.

19. 5. Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development. Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholar-ship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.

20. 6. Unit Governance and Resources The unit has the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources including information technology resources, for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

21. Questions Asked by BOE Teams zWhat data show that candidates know their subject matter? zHow well are candidates performing on content and teaching tests? zHow effective are candidates in their internships?

22. More Questions zHow do faculty know that candidates are competent teachers or counselors or principals, etc.? zWhat assessments are used by faculty and programs to determine that candidates should continue or complete programs?

23. and more... zWhat rubrics have been developed to guide decisions about performance? zWhat happens to candidates not performing at the level expected? zWhat performance assessments are being used?

24. and finally... zWhat decisions are made at what point of the program? zHow are data being compiled and reviewed to improve programs?

25. The NCATE 2000 Visit

26. Institutional Report for Continuing Visits in NCATE 2000 I.Overview of Unit and Institution II.Conceptual Framework IV.Evidence for Meeting Each Standard III. Overview of Programs for the Preparation of Educators

27. Section IV of the IR: The unit should zDiscuss evidence holistically. zRelate evidence to elements of standard. zExplain nature of evidence in context of the standard. zPresent evidence in clear & concise manner.

28. Report Differences zContinuing Visits yfocus in-depth on the first two standards and their elements. yreport holistically on the last four standards are addressed. z Initial Visits yall six standards and their elements should be addressed in- depth.

29. Changes in Visits zNature of the evidence y- performance rather than input oriented zMore focused group interviews yfewer individual interviews

30. Evidence zCurrent System yminutes of meetings ysyllabi ystudent & faculty work yinterviews with faculty, students, school personnel, administrators yvisits to schools yperformance data, including state licensure results z NCATE 2000 ycandidates’ portfolios yobservations of teaching yprofessional, state, & institutional assessments of content knowledge, professional & pedagogical knowledge, skills, dispositions, & effects on student learning yNBPTS & other advanced certification

31. Guidelines for Assessing Quality of Evidence zReviewing surveys zAssessing student work samples zReviewing test results zAssessing evaluations zReviewing portfolios zAssessing student learning zAssessing rubrics & scoring systems for institutions & BOE members

32. UAB Accreditation Decisions zInitial Visits yAccredited yProvisional Accreditation xto be removed within two years with a focused visit yDenied Accreditation z Continuing Visits yAccreditation Continued yAccreditation Continued with Conditions xto be removed within two years with a focused visit yAccreditation Continued with probation xto be removed within two years by an initial-like visit PROPOSED