CAEP Year-End Summary Timeline Report

Accreditation and Continuous Improvement

2015-2016 Timelines & 2014-2015 Year-End Summary

2015-2016 Timelines

Summer Timelines

• Self-Study Development – The main focus of the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) during the summer will be writing the self-study.
• Internal Audit – An internal audit evaluating our program will be completed in July 2015. This internal audit must evaluate CAEP standards 2 (Clinical Experience); 3 (Selectivity) and 5 (Quality Assurance). A report describing the findings from the internal audit must be included in the self-study. Faculty in coordination with OPR will facilitate the internal audit.
• Data Analysis – Simultaneous with the self-study development data analysis will be occurring throughout May, June, July and August. Data from the past 3 to 5 years pertaining to outcomes of candidate learning will be compiled from various assessment units such as MTTC, MDE Teacher Exit Survey and Clinical Evaluations.
• Case Study Development for Program Impact- Faculty will be asked to assist in developing a case study to evaluate our completer’s effectiveness and impact on P-12 learning to address Standard 4.
• Common Assessment Tool Evaluation & Alignment to InTasc – Faculty will be charged with evaluating all current assessment tools and aligning them with the InTasc Standards. The InTasc Standards are required by CAEP as well as by the Michigan Department of Education.

Fall 2015 Timelines

• September 14 – The final draft of the self-study will be submitted to the Provost’s Office by September 14, 2015.

• October 1 – The final draft of the self-study will be submitted to CAEP by October 1, 2015
• CAEP Fall Conference 9/16-9/18 – The OPR will attend the CAEP conference to meet with CAEP staff to prepare for the site visit.

• Prepare for CAEP Accreditation Site Visit – Much of semester will require data collection, data analysis, implementation of new pilot programs, and improvement of our quality assurance system.

Spring 2016 Timelines

• February 28-March 2 – The CAEP site visit will involve administration, faculty, staff, and school district representatives from partner schools.

Key Progress Highlights

As CMU is approaching the self-study reporting for the CAEP, the accreditation team has been executing key tasks with diligence, and working closely with the Michigan Department of Education representatives, CAEP reviewers and other early adopter institutions in Michigan. The key progresses made for CAEP accreditation, currently, are grouped under 6 categories, i.e., CAEP Standards 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and Miscellaneous, to provide a better perspective of the progress details. The Figure-1 provides an overview of the new initiatives, pending tasks and the percentage of progress made towards addressing or meeting the specific standards as explained in the CAEP evidence table (Reference - CAEP Accreditation Handbook, Feb 2015)

CAEP Standard-1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge

Curriculum Mapping

In order to ensure that candidate preparation is aligned with national, state and specialized professional association (SPA) standards recommended by CAEP, a curricular mapping process was completed for the elementary program. Efforts will continue in fall 2015 to complete curricular mapping for all the PEU majors and professional education sequence courses.

Curriculum Analysis

Student learning objectives and assessments listed in the master course syllabus of all the undergraduate PEU courses continue to be analyzed to gather evidence for the corresponding sub-classes of the CAEP standards.

Common Assessments: Analysis

The OPR is awaiting feedback from CAEP on the common assessment tools submitted to CAEP in November 2014. Feedback is expected by June 2015. This feedback is a critical first step in analyzing the validity and reliability of our current assessments according to CAEP standards. In addition, a protocol for testing reliability and validity of the EPI assessment measures is under development.

As part of improving the quality of EPI assessment metrics, a preliminary analysis evaluating existing rubrics and survey tools using the recently published CAEP’s “Rubric for evaluating assessment instruments” has been initiated.

An ad hoc committee met and reviewed the common assessment tools used across PEU for its adequacy in addressing the CAEP standards. The committee recommended the following:

1) All common assessments be aligned to the InTasc Standards

2) The pre-student teaching and student teaching evaluations be aligned

3) The TEPD e-portfolio be reviewed for its use as a common assessment

4) Examine the use of video-based observations as a common assessment tool

5) Resources be made available for faculty to complete the recommendations.

CAEP Standard-2: Clinical Partnerships and Practice

Clinical Partnerships

The collaboration between Department of Teacher Education and Professional Development (TEPD), the Center for Clinical Experience (CCE) and St. Johns Public Schools (SJPS) is continuing to evolve.

Clinical Experience

The CCE has met with all the programs across the Professional Education Unit (PEU) to develop a common clinical experience for the students in the B.S. in Education’s pre-student teaching experience. The CCE has been working with programs to offer a consistent 60-80 hours of pre-student teaching clinical experience.

Clinical Handbooks

The team has been reviewing clinical experience documents (i.e., handbooks, forms) to update for consistent language for clinical experiences across the PEU.

Clinical Educators

The team has been reviewing current procedures on selection, training, evaluation and retention of clinical educators.

A glossary of clinical experience terms used in the PEU programs is under development.

Ad hoc committee on Clinical Experience

An ad hoc committee has been formed to assist with the planning and implementation of clinical standards, as required by CAEP. The focus of this committee has been on qualifications, training and evaluation of University Coordinators and Mentor Teachers. This committee will continue to meet in June 2015 to make final recommendations for an action plan. Some areas that need to be enhanced include the following:

1) Review partnership agreement

2) Improve consistency across all clinical experiences

3) Identification of entry points for sequentially placing clinical experiences throughout the curriculum (Year 1, 2, 3 and 4)

4) Develop clinical educator selection, training, evaluation and retention policies

5) Analyze relationship between clinical practices and candidate learning outcomes

6) Develop methods of monitoring candidate performance throughout the clinical experience

7) Develop a method for evaluating teacher Candidates’ impact on P-12 students learning and development during their clinical experiences.

CAEP Standard-3: Candidate Quality, Recruitment and Selectivity

Teacher Candidate Selection Protocol

The teacher candidate selection protocol that focuses on non-academic standards for effective teaching is moving forward. A protocol including the selection criteria has been adopted from Selections Solutions, LLC (SSLLC). A pilot study will begin in Fall 2015.

Teacher Candidate Vs Michigan School Profile

Data from the past three years pertaining to race, ethnicity, and other backgrounds of teacher education candidates was analyzed to determine the coherency with Michigan schools’ profiles.

Ad hoc committee on Candidate Quality, Recruitment and Selectivity

An ad hoc committee has been formed to assist with the planning and implementation of the selectivity standards of CAEP. This committee will continue to meet June 2015 to make final recommendations.

CAEP Standard-4: Program Impact

Completer’s Effectiveness Study

Given the critical nature of Standard-4 of the CAEP accreditation process, the OPR will develop a pilot survey to collect effectiveness data on program completers. For future data collection, a case study to analyze completers’ effectiveness and impact on P-12 learning will be developed for future implementation.

Teaching Effectiveness and Program Impact Committee

An ad hoc committee has been formed to review and recommend measures that can estimate how program completers are contributing for student-learning. As completers’ effectiveness involves P-12 school data. This committee will continue to meet June 2015 to make final recommendations.

In addition, the OPR is working with MDE representatives for their support in designing and implementing these types of measures statewide.

CAEP Standard-5: Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement

Student Learning Data Management System

Following approval from the Dean of the CEHS in December 2014, the Taskstream learning data management system final contract has been signed. Initial training has begun with OPR and thepilotingwill startwithtwooftheBSinEdprogramsandsubsequentlyinvolveotherprogramsasitmovesforward. Due to limited faculty availability, initial implementation will begin with the special education department this summer. The second program will be identified and begin implementation fall 2015.

PEU Mission

Teacher education Taskforce members and CAEP accreditation team have developed a final draft of the PEU mission and vision statements. The mission statements would help set targets/performance benchmarks and evaluate programs’ performances against those mission and goals.

PEU Quality Assurance System

A detailed plan including (a) the definition of PEU quality Assurance System (b) components and mechanism of the assurance system (c) key performance indicators and (d) implementation time line has been developed.

An ad hoc committee was formed to review our current system to ensure program quality. The committee focused on faculty use of data to make data-based decisions regarding program improvement. The committee has made the following recommendations:

1)Bring PEU faculty together at an August assessment kick-off event to discuss the MTTC and MDE Teacher Exit Survey, with the first priority being the MTTC.

2)Data packets would be disseminated at this August workshop to increase motivation for faculty to attend.

3)We also suggested another assessment workshop during faculty preparation week in January, followed by a monthly infrastructure support component.

Collaboration, Communication and Transparency

The OPR has worked diligently to increase communication and transparency across multiple entities. Some highlights include:

1) Worked and continue to work with Mike Carson to develop a culture of inquiry through assessment across campus

2) Met with faculty across the PEU to increase understanding of the CAEP standards

3) Addressing individual program data needs

4) Hosting a series of Q&A luncheons to encourage faculty involvement in the CAEP process

5) Updating the PEU website for ease of use and access to CAEP information

6) Developing collaborative relationships with other universities in MI and across the country

7) Establishingcollaborative working relationships with MDE representatives

8) Working to develop an open and positive relationship with key CAEP leadership.

The presence of CMU through the Office of Planning and Research across the state and beyond has been extremely positive. The OPR has been asked to present at conferences and many institutions across MI have reached out for input and collaboration. The OPR will continue to develop these collaborations and to demonstrate that CMU is a leader in educator preparation.