101

May 2005

An accrediting body forschools, colleges, and

departments of education recognized by the U.S.

Department of Education and the Commission on Higher

Education Accreditation

NCATE’s Constituent Members

TeachersSpecialized ProfessionalAssociations

State &Local

Policymakers

TeacherEducation

NCATE GOVERNANCEExecutive 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

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

Accreditation Conditional Probation

WrittenDocumentation Focused

Visit

Accreditation Revocation

Within 6 monthsWithin 2 years

Accreditation

Within 12-18 months

Within2 years

Full Visit

First Accreditation Visit

Accreditation Provisional Denial

WrittenDocumentation Focused

Visit

Accreditation Revocation

Within 6 monthsWithin 2 years

Accreditation

Within 12-18 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

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)

Unacceptable Acceptable Target

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

Unacceptable Acceptable Target

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 (SpecializedProfessional

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 & Professional & Pedagogical Pedagogical Knowledge, Knowledge, Skills, & Skills, & DispositionsDispositions

Rubric elements 3-Rubric elements 3-55

P-12 Student P-12 Student LearningLearning

Rubric elements 6-Rubric elements 6-77

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

30-60 days before visit

Visit Date

Institutional Report Due

Previsit with Team Chair

The On-site Visit

Board of Examiners Teams

TeacherEducation

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 Committees4-5 Members with 6-9

cases

Joint Audit Committees2 Audit Committees

Full UAB32 Members

Consent Agenda

Recommendations for Denial, Probation, or Revocation

Continuing Accreditation Cycle

Accreditation Decision

YEAR 1Annual Report

YEAR 2Annual Report

YEAR 3Annual Report

YEAR 4Annual Report

YEAR 7Institutional

Report& Visit

YEAR 6Annual Report &Program Review

Documents

YEAR 5Annual Report

Probation2 years Visit

Conditional2 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…