Chepko Presentation 3

Timeline for Accreditation

Handbook and Early Adopters

Stevie Chepko, Sr., VP for Accreditation

Stevie.cheko@caepnet.org

Elizabeth Vilky, Sr. Director, Program Review

Elizabeth.Vilky@caepnet.org

CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org

| Twitter: @CAEPupdates

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

• Sept. 17- Draft 2 of Accreditation Handbook

 Sent to staff

 Sent of Chairs of IB, CI/TI and Chair of Accreditation

Council

 Sent to focus group participants

• Sept. 29 & 30 – Discussion with selected focus groups at CAEP Conference

• Oct. 10 – Draft 3 of Accreditation Handbook

 Sent to staff

 Sent to Accreditation Council members

 Partners and other stakeholders




(cont.)

• Oct 26 – 30 – Accreditation Council acts on policy changes related to procedures in the Accreditation

Handbook

 Discussions in committees on policies and procedures as defined in the Accreditation Handbook

 Thursday, October 31, 2014 – Accreditation Council finalizes recommendations to the Board

• Nov. 15 – Recommendation sent to CAEP Board from

Accreditation Council on policy and procedure changes

• Nov. 20 – Accreditation Handbook uploaded to

CAEP Board site




(cont.)

• Dec. 4 – 6 CAEP Board Acts on recommendation from Accreditation Council

 Reviews Policy and Procedure changes

 Once changes are approved, staff will be charged with making the necessary changes in all documents

• April 1 – Final copy released

 Copies available at CAEP Conference in Denver

 Copy available on-line



Overview of the CAEP Accreditation

Pathways

Stevie Chepko, Senior Vice President for

Accreditation

Stevie.chepko@caepnet.org



Session Outline

CAEP process—general framework with common elements

 Eligibility: same for all pathways

 Program Review: same for all pathways, but varies by state

 Self-study

 Site visit: (almost) same for all pathways

 Accreditation Council: same for all pathways

 Annual Reporting Process: (almost) same for all pathways

 (Pending Accreditation Council and CAEP Board

Approval)



The Three Pathways

• Continuous Improvement (CI)

• Transformation Initiative (TI)

• Inquiry Brief (IB)

Pathways differ chiefly in what is submitted for the selfstudy:

• Format

• Addressing the Standards

• Demonstrating quality assurance

• (Pending Accreditation Council & CAEP Board Approval)



Distinctive characteristics: CI

• Format: structured report

• Addressing the standards: EPPs write directly to the standards with evidence and supporting narrative

• Demonstrating quality assurance: The EPP develops and implements a data-driven Continuous

Improvement Plan that focuses on improvement with respect to a selected Standard, Standard component, or cross-cutting theme




Distinctive characteristics: TI

• Format: structured report

• Addressing the standards: The EPP writes directly to the standards with evidence and supporting narrative

• Demonstrating quality assurance: The EPP develops a

Transformation Initiative Plan (sometimes in consortium with states, schools, or other collaborators) for a rigorous research investigation of an aspect of educator preparation that will inform the profession and/or offer research-proven models for replication of promising practices




Distinctive Characteristics: IB

• Format: research monograph

• Addressing the standards: The EPP make claims consistent with its own goals and mission about the competence of its completers and align the claims to the Standards

• Demonstrating quality assurance: The EPP describes its quality assurance system and conducts an internal audit to determine whether the system is functioning as designed

• (

Pending Accreditation Council & CAEP Board Approval)



Writing the Self-Study: Common Elements

• EPP context same for all pathways

• Evidence

• Characterization of the quality of the evidence

• Discussion of results and their implications

• Demonstration of quality assurance




Writing the Self-Study: CI/TI

• EPP context

• Evidence uploaded for each standard

• Five questions for each source of evidence with respect to the standard it is supporting

 what is it

 what evidence is available regarding its quality

 what criteria has been established for successful performance (and why)

 what do the reported results mean

 how are results used in improvement

• Response to Area(s) for Improvement (from last review including legacy)

• Submission of CI or TI plan




Writing the Self-Study: The CI Plan

• A description of the focal area for continuous improvement standard(s)/component(s)/themes

• Rationale for selecting the focal area – Why? What are the baseline data? What are the goals

• Plan for Continuous Improvement – what you are going to improve on and how

• Evidence of success – emphasis on data quality

• Progress will be reported annually by the EPP and evaluated during the subsequent accreditation visit to determine if components 5.3 and 5.4 of Standard 5 are satisfied




Writing the Self-Study: The TI Plan

• Significance of the Project

• Quality of the Project Design

• Quality of the Research Design

• Capacity to Conduct the Initiative

• Progress will be reported annually by the EPP and evaluated during the subsequent accreditation visit to determine if components 5.3 and 5.4 of Standard 5 are satisfied

• In self-study, the progress on the TI proposal is evaluated. Role it plays in the accreditation decision is in Standard 5.




Writing the Self-Study: IB

• EPP context

• Evidence identified for each claim

• Discussion of rationale and reliability/validity of each source of evidence with respect to the claim it is supporting

 what is it

 what evidence is available regarding its quality

 what criteria has been established for successful performance (and why)

• Presentation of results

• Discussion of results and their implications

 what do the reported results mean

 how are results used in improvement

• Report on internal audit




Writing the Self-Study: The IB Internal Audit

• Description of the quality assurance system

 Curriculum

 Faculty

 Facilities/Resources

 Candidates

 Clinical Partnerships

• Description of the procedure followed in conducting the internal audit

• Presentation of the findings, the conclusions that faculty draws from the findings, and a discussion of the implications for the program.




The Site Visit

(almost) same for all pathways

• Activities: site visitors will look at documentation and conduct interviews of various parties involved in the

EPP

• Purpose: site visitors will evaluate the accuracy and quality of the evidence

• Result: site visit report and EPP response

• CI/TI: examination of progress on the development and implementation of the CI Plan or TI Plan

• IB: examination and verification of internal audit




The Accreditation Decision same for all pathways

• Initial and joint reviews resulting in recommendations for accreditation status and AFIs/stipulations if appropriate

• Acceptance of recommendations by the

Accreditation Council as a whole

• EPP representative is invited to observe initial review of case




Annual Reporting

(almost) same for all pathways

• Submissions made between January and April

• Mostly the same sections, with one pathway-specific section

• (Pending Accreditation Council & CAEP Board

Approval)



Questions?



Chepko Presentation 3

Timeline for Accreditation

Handbook and Early Adopters

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

(cont.)

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

(cont.)

Overview of the CAEP Accreditation

Pathways

Session Outline

The Three Pathways

Distinctive characteristics: CI

Distinctive characteristics: TI

Distinctive Characteristics: IB

Writing the Self-Study: Common Elements

Writing the Self-Study: CI/TI

Writing the Self-Study: The CI Plan

Writing the Self-Study: The TI Plan

Writing the Self-Study: IB

Writing the Self-Study: The IB Internal Audit

The Site Visit

(almost) same for all pathways

The Accreditation Decision same for all pathways

Annual Reporting

(almost) same for all pathways

Questions?

Related documents

Products

Support

Chepko Presentation 3

Timeline for Accreditation

Handbook and Early Adopters

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

(cont.)

Timeline for Accreditation Handbook

(cont.)

Overview of the CAEP Accreditation

Pathways

Session Outline

The Three Pathways

Distinctive characteristics: CI

Distinctive characteristics: TI

Distinctive Characteristics: IB

Writing the Self-Study: Common Elements

Writing the Self-Study: CI/TI

Writing the Self-Study: The CI Plan

Writing the Self-Study: The TI Plan

Writing the Self-Study: IB

Writing the Self-Study: The IB Internal Audit

The Site Visit

(almost) same for all pathways

The Accreditation Decision same for all pathways

Annual Reporting

(almost) same for all pathways

Questions?

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib