NCATE’s
Transformation Initiative
Web Seminar will begin at 2:00 (eastern time).
Please link to the audio service a few minutes before 2:00.
Donna M. Gollnick
Senior Vice President, NCATE
September 16, 2009
NCATE Transformation Initiatives
2:00 – 2:15
Options for Continuing Accreditation
2:15 – 2:30
IR & TI Proposal
2:30 – 2:45
Offsite Review
2:45– 3:00
Onsite Visit
3:00 - 3:15
Responsibilities of Piloting
3:15 – 3:30
Remaining Q & A
NCATE staff on the
web seminar

Donna M. Gollnick, Senior Vice President

Mary Beth Nowinski, Interim Director

Mary Anne Kirkland, Assistant to Donna
Two Options for
Continuing Visits:
1. Continuous Improvement
2. Transformation Initiative
Option 1:
Continuous
Improvement
Focus of the Review:
Continuous Improvement

The unit will engage in continuous
improvement between on-site visits.
– Submit annual reports
– Describe changes in the IR
– Submit IR at least one year before visit
for feedback

The unit will assess itself against
the target level of one or more
standards.
Option 2:
Transformation
Initiative
Focus of the
Transformation Initiative
•
Engagement in an initiative
for self-improvement and
contribution to the
improvement & reform of
the profession, including
learning in P-12 schools
Transformation Initiatives

Candidate recruitment

Clinical practice

Induction & mentoring

Diversity-based skills

Educator retention



Follow-up performance
data
Validity studies of
assessments
Professional development



Partnerships with P-12
schools for the
transformation of
student learning &
conditions that support
learning
Improving P-16 system
(e.g., college readiness,
access, & completion)
Use of formative
assessments to improve
student learning
Eligibility for TI

Unit must clearly show that it has been
engaged in continuous improvement
since the last visit & continues to meet
standards.
– Submission of TI IR three years before
visit (adjusted for pilots)
– TI IR reviewed by Offsite BOE Team
along with other evidence to determine
eligibility
TI IR
1. How has the unit been engaged in
continuous improvement related to
standards since the last visit
 What data/research supported work?
 What changes resulted?
 What are the unit’s plan for continuing to
improve?
2. Cross-walk to standards if IR is organized
by changes or work undertaken since last
visit
Proposal for TI
1. Importance of TI for educator preparation
&/or P-12 student learning
2. Goal(s) of the TI
3. Plan for TI, including research question,
research methodology, collaborators,
research evaluation plan, dissemination
plan, timelines, & budget
4. Capacity of the unit to conduct the TI
5. (Optional) Potential consultants for TI
Exhibits
To be available for the
Offsite Review &
Onsite Visit
Available to BOE Teams
in AIMS
1. Program reports submitted for national review
2. National recognition reports
3. Reports from the previous NCATE visit
4. 3rd party testimony
5. Annual Reports
6. Other relevant national or state reports uploaded in
AIMS
General Background and
Conceptual Framework
1. Links to unit catalogs and other printed documents
describing general education, specialty/content studies,
and professional studies.
2. Syllabi for professional education courses
3. Conceptual framework(s)
4. Findings of other national accreditation associations
related to the preparation of education professionals
(e.g., ASHA, NASM, APA, CACREP)
Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge,
Skills, and Professional Dispositions
1. State program review documents and state findings.[1] (Some of these documents may
be available in AIMS.)
2. State licensure test scores aggregated by program area and reported over multiple years
(Title II data reports submitted to the state for the last year must be available to the
team.)
3. Data tables and summaries that show how teacher candidates (both initial and
advanced) have performed on key assessments over the past three years for programs
not included in the national program review process or a similar state process
4. Key assessments and scoring guides used by faculty to assess candidate learning against
standards and the outcomes identified in the unit’s conceptual framework for programs
not included in the national program review process or a similar state process
5. Samples of candidate work (e.g., portfolios at different proficiency levels)
6. Follow-up studies of graduates and data tables of results
7. Employer feedback on graduates and summaries of the results
8. List of candidate dispositions, including fairness and the belief that all students can
learn, and related assessments, scoring guides, and data
Standard 2: Assessment System &
Unit Evaluation
1. Description of the unit’s assessment system in detail including the requirements and
key assessments used at transition points
2. Data from key assessments used at entry to programs
3. Procedures for ensuring that key assessments and unit operations are fair, accurate,
consistent, and free of bias
4. Policies and procedures that ensure that data are regularly collected, compiled,
aggregated, summarized, analyzed, and used to make improvements
5. Sample of candidate assessment data disaggregated by alternate route, off-campus,
and distance learning programs
6. Policies for handling student complaints
7. File of student complaints and the unit’s response (available onsite)
8. Examples of changes made to courses, programs, and the unit in response to data
gathered from the assessment system
Standard 3: Field Experiences &
Clinical Practice
1. Memoranda of understanding, contracts, and/or other documents that demonstrate
partnerships with schools
2. Criteria for the selection of school faculty (e.g., cooperating teachers, internship
supervisors)
3. Documentation of the preparation of school faculty for their roles (e.g, orientation and
other meetings)
4. Descriptions of field experiences and clinical practice in programs for initial and
advanced teacher candidates and other school professionals
5. Guidelines for student teaching and internships
6. Assessments and scoring rubrics/criteria used in field experiences and clinical practice
for initial and advanced teacher candidates and other school professionals (These
assessments may be included in program review documents or the exhibits for
Standard 1. Cross reference as appropriate.)
Standard 4: Diversity
1. Proficiencies related to diversity that candidates are expected to develop
2. Curriculum components that address diversity proficiencies (This might be
a matrix that shows diversity components in required courses.)
3. Assessment instruments, scoring guides, and data related to diversity
(These assessments may be included in program review documents or the
exhibits for Standard 1. Cross reference as appropriate.)
4. Policies and practices for recruiting and retaining a diverse faculty
5. Policies and practices for recruiting and retaining diverse candidates
6. Policies, practices, and/or procedures that facilitate candidate experiences
with students from diverse groups
Standard 5: Faculty Qualifications,
Performance, and Development
1. Licensure information on school faculty (e.g., cooperating teachers, internship
supervisors)[1]
2. Samples of faculty scholarly activities
3. Summary of service and collaborative activities engaged in by faculty with the
professional community (e.g., grants, evaluations, task force participation, provision of
professional development, offering courses, etc.)
4. Promotion and tenure policies and procedures
5. Samples of forms used in faculty evaluation and the resulting data summaries
6. Opportunities for professional development activities provided by the unit
[1]
The faculty chart in AIMS will also be used as evidence for this standard.
Standard 6: Unit Governance and
Resources
1. Policies on governance and operations of the unit
2. Organizational chart or description of the unit governance structure
3. Unit policies on student services such as counseling and advising
4. Recruiting and admission policies for candidates
5. Academic calendars, catalogs, unit publications, grading policies, and unit advertising
6. Unit budget, with provisions for assessment, technology, and professional development
7. Budgets of comparable units with clinical components on campus or similar units at
other campuses
8. Faculty workload policies
9. Summary of faculty workloads
10. List of facilities, including computer labs and curriculum resource centers
11. Description of library resources
12. Description of resources for distance learning, if applicable.
Presentation of Exhibits
1. Online Exhibit Room
2. List of exhibits identified in Prompt #3
of the IR provides links to key exhibits
supporting each standard
***Please use NCATE’s list of exhibits***
The Offsite Review 3
years before visit
(adjusted for pilots)
Offsite BOE Team



Team of 3-5 persons that meets
electronically with state consultant &
NCATE staff member
If state protocol calls for joint visit,
state team member may join team
If possible, one of team members will
be assigned to Onsite BOE Team
New Feature
Unit head & NCATE
coordinator be available to
answer questions during
the Offsite Review
Offsite Reviews


Offsite BOE Team will meet
electronically to review Mid-cycle IR,
determine eligibility for TI, & write BOE
Feedback Report
Committee on Transformation
Initiative will review TI proposal &
provide feedback &/or request
additional information or clarification
Offsite Review
The Offsite BOE Team reviews the
following electronically & prepares
feedback report for unit:
• Institutional report
• Annual reports
• Title II data
• Program reviews by SPAs or states
• Exhibits related to standards
Feedback Report by
Offsite BOE Team
1. Statement about the evidence
•
•
Does the evidence make the case that standards continue to be
met?
What, if any, key evidence was not available to the team?
2. Comments on unit’s progress toward meeting
target level
3. Feedback on correcting previous AFIs
4. List of areas of concern by standard
5. List of evidence for the Onsite BOE Team to
validate during the onsite visit
Timeline: Offsite Review for TI
12 months before visit
Unit submits IR
1-3 months after the IR is
submitted
Offsite BOE Team meets
electronically to review IR &
write BOE Feedback Report
Generally within 1-2 weeks
after Offsite BOE Team
meeting
BOE Feedback Report is
available in AIMS
1-2 months before the onsite
visit and before the previsit
with the team chair, state
team co-chair, & state
consultant
Unit submits IR Addendum,
which responds to Areas of
Concern in the BOE Feedback
Report
The Onsite Visit
Onsite Visit: TI


Follows CI onsite visit process with the
addition of feedback on the implementation
of the TI
Onsite BOE Team has access to
– Offsite BOE Feedback Report
– Updated data for Standard 1
– Updated exhibits & other data

Expert or consultant on the TI may be
asked to serve as a resource to the Onsite
BOE team
Onsite Visit: Continuous
Improvement
Smaller team will conduct shorter
visit by
1. Focusing on areas of concern raised by
Offsite Visit BOE Team
2. Validating that standards continue to be
met
3. Providing feedback on progress toward
the target level on one or more standards
Activities: Sunday




Team members arrive
onsite by 1 pm
Team meeting
Orientation by institution
& state
(Optional) Poster
sessions
Activities: Monday

Visits to 2-4 schools

Observations

Interviews

Sampling of Evidence

Team Meetings
Activities: Tuesday

Follow-up interviews as needed

Team meeting
– Complete writing of BOE report

Exit report to unit

Team leaves by 3 pm
Timeline: TI Option
Spring Visit Cycle
Action
Fall Visit Cycle
February 1
(3 yrs. before visit)
Program reports due for national
review.
September 15
(3 yrs. before visit)
September 15
(2½ yrs. before visit)
TI IR & proposal due
February 1
(1½ yrs. before visit)
October/December
(1-3 mos. before visit)
Offsite BOE Team reviews IR &
writes BOE Feedback Report
March/April
(1-3 mos. before visit)
December
Committee on TI meets
May
April
CTI findings reported to UAB
October
Unit engages in TI
1-2 mos. before visit
Unit submits response to Offsite
BOE Feedback Report
Onsite BOE Team conducts visit
1-2 mos. before visit
Thank you
for joining NCATE in
designing & refining a
more streamlined &
valuable accreditation
process.