Post Certification Graduate Athletic Training Education Program Accreditation Site Visitor Workshop

1
Post Certification Graduate Athletic Training
Education Program Accreditation Site Visitor
Workshop

• GRADUATE REVIEW COMMITTEE
• GRADUATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
• June 2003

2
Outline

• I. Philosophy of the Graduate Standards and
  Guidelines
• II. Overview of the Site Accreditation Visit
• III. Conducting the Site Accreditation Visit
• IV. The Report
• V. The Accreditation Decision Process
• VI. Common Areas of Concern and Scenarios

3
I. Philosophy of the Graduate Standards and
Guidelines
4
II. Overview of the Site Accreditation Visit

• A. Purpose
• B. The Site Visitor
• C. Benefits of the Report

5
A. The Purpose of the Site Visit

• Validate and/or clarify the contents of the self
  study report
• Determine the extent to which the program
  complies with the standards and guidelines
• Provide recommendations on program
  enhancement/improvement
• To provide objective feedback to the program for
  the enhancement of student education

6
The Purpose cont.

• In some instances act as a liaison for the AT
  faculty in reinforcing and describing
  programmatic objectives, strengths or areas of
  concern based on national standards, particularly
  to Administrators and Academic Deans whose
  exposure to the program may be limited
• The Site Visitor should act in the best interest
  of the profession by promoting advanced graduate
  education

7
B. The Site Visitor

• Must understand the role of the site visit
• Must be knowledgeable of the standards and
  guidelines and uphold them
• Must be knowledgeable of the program and the
  academic unit in which it is housed
• Must convey professionalism
• Has a genuine interest and concern for promoting
  post-certification graduate athletic training
  education
• Must remain objective and fair
• Roles of the Chair and Team Member
• Difference between JRC-AT and GRC visitor mindset

8
C. Benefits of the Report

• Provides critical feedback regarding program
  compliance and non-compliance with the standards
  and guidelines
• Identifies the programs areas of strength to
  reinforce positive aspects of the educational
  program
• Identifies areas of concern so that program
  administrators and faculty can take action to
  improve their program
• Promotes critical reflection on the program by
  administrators, faculty, staff, and students, to
  foster continual quality improvement
• Provides suggestions for improvement that can
  serve as goals and objectives for future program
  improvements

9
III. Conducting the Site Accreditation Visit

• A. Site Visitor Preparation
• B. Site Visit Agenda

10
A. Site Visitor Preparation

• Review the self study report and accompanying
  materials
• Communicate with the other site visitor regarding
  preliminary areas of concern and/or points of
  clarification
• Request any additional materials necessary for
  clarification purposes
• Develop, review and approve proposed site visit
  agenda
• Preliminary on-site meeting of site visit team
  members to develop on site strategy

11
A. Site Visitor Preparation

• Ann additional materials that are requested from
  the Site Visitor should be bound.
• 2 copies to Lynne Caruthers and 1 copy to each
  visitor
• HintIf requesting materials, provide a date upon
  which you would like the materials
• Site Visitors can request additional materials to
  be available upon the site visit.

12
B. Site Visit Agenda

• 1. Entrance Meeting
• 2. Interview Segments (PD, faculty/staff,
  student, administrators, etc.)
• 3. Site Visitor Work Sessions
• 4. Clinical/Research Visitations
• 5. Program Director Exit Conference
• 6. Exit Conference
• 7. Optional Post Exit Conference

13
Site Visit Agenda Guidelines

• Single Meeting Room
• Working lunches/dinners
• Travel time
• PD scheduled first
• Time allotments
• Clinical Supervisor meeting

14
1. Entrance Meeting

• Introductions
• General Thank you
• State purpose of site visitation and explain how
  the visit will be conducted
• Explain the process of the accreditation timeline
• Ask if there are any general questions

15
2. Interview Segments

• Introductions
• Explain the purpose of the interview
• Question and answer
• May have time for the individual to ask you
  questions
• Thank you

16

• Act as Fact Verifiers not Critical Proclaimers

17
Program Director

• Purpose of the interview
• Overview of the program by PD
• Vision for the program
• Scope of PDs responsibilities
• Strengths and areas of concern identified by PD
• Direct the discussions toward key issues that
  need additional information and clarification
• Request any additional information needed
• Determine if there are issues or components of
  the review that the Site Visitation Team can
  reinforce that would be of benefit for the AT
  Program.

18

• Potential Questions
• How does the program fit into the mission of the
  institution?
• What are the plans in the department for _____
  for the next 3-5 years?
• To whom do you report? Who else is important to
  the future of the program?
• What interaction do you have with other faculty
  on campus?
• What is allotted/contracted distribution of
  effort, i.e. percent teaching, administration,
  service? And is this accurate when compared to
  actual effort?

19
Chair/Dean

• Purpose of the Interview
• To determine the future of the program
• Growth
• Financial issues
• Response to the community
• Job market
• Tenure
• Budget
• Equality of policies among the faculty for this
  program versus other schools/colleges/units
• Support for the program and its relationship to
  the mission of the College/School and University

20

• Potential Questions
• What is their general impression/view of the
  GATEP?
• What do you see as the future direction of the
  program?
• How does the GATEP fit into your academic unit?
• What are the standards for promotion and tenure?
  How do the program faculty fair?

21
Program Faculty

• Purpose of the Interview
• Determine what they consider the major program
  strengths and areas of concern to be
• Determine approaches used in teaching their areas
• Determine their understanding of the goals and
  objectives of the program
• Determine their perception of the students
• Assess their involvement in program planning and
  implementation
• Evaluate faculty teaching loads and appropriate
  student to faculty ratios

22

• Potential Questions
• How does your course fit into the curriculum
  design?
• What teaching methods do you incorporate to
  ensure maximum learning?
• How have the students ranked among those that you
  teach?
• What role do you play in program planning and
  design?
• What do you feel are the programs areas of
  strength and areas of concern?
• What role do you play in the research requirement
  that the students must meet?

23
Clinical Supervisors

• Purpose of the Interview
• To determine the extent of collaboration between
  the academic and clinical affiliates
• Their perception of the students preparation for
  advanced practice
• Their perception of program strengths and areas
  of concern
• Their support and understanding of the mission of
  the program
• Are students given appropriate autonomy to
  practice?
• Is appropriate student feedback provided to
  enhance learning?

24

• Potential Questions
• What form of interaction do you have with the
  program administration, faculty and students?
• Can you describe your role in the development of
  the clinical objectives?
• What special strengths do students from this
  program bring to the clinical aspect? What are
  their weaknesses?
• What areas do you notice improvement in while the
  students are with you?
• What suggestions for improvement do you have for
  the program?

25
Students

• Purpose of the Interview
• An opportunity to hear their perspective
  regarding the strengths and areas of concern of
  the program
• Determine to what extent the students understand
  the mission and unique characteristics of their
  program
• Identify to what extent the students are allowed
  to give feedback for program improvement
• Collaborate information provided in the
  self-study regarding course work, clinical
  experiences, and the research experience
• Obtain candid student evaluations of faculty
  teaching and clinical supervisor effectiveness

26
Students

• Purpose of the Interview
• Verify financial package for clinical/teaching/res
  earch responsibilities
• Assess student responsiveness to the current
  course offerings and strengths/areas of concern
  of the curriculum
• Assess students perception and evaluation of the
  Area(s) of Distinctiveness

27

• Potential Questions
• Even the best educational program can be
  improved. What do you think could be done to
  make this program better?
• Why did you choose this program?
• If you could change one thing about this program
  what would it be?
• Do you feel that the program has increased your
  knowledge in the designated areas of
  distinctiveness?

28
3. Site Visitor Work Sessions

• Several working sessions for the site visitors
  should be scheduled throughout the on site
  visitation
• These allow for the visitation officers to
  dialogue about their individual and collective
  impressions of the program
• These serve as excellent work meetings to begin
  preparing the preliminary report

29
4. Clinical/Research Visitations

• Allot ample time
• Site Visitors can split up
• Representative sites visited (may use videotape
  for remainder of sites)

30
5. Program Director Exit Conference

• Share the findings and conclusions in the draft
  of the site visit report with the PD prior to the
  exit conference
• Give the PD opportunity to clarify or rebut
  initial findings and conclusions

31
6. Exit Conference

• In the beginning of the Exit Conference, make it
  clear to the attendees that the purpose of the
  Exit Conference is to present the information
  from the visit NOT to provide an opportunity for
  further discussion on how to rectify or improve
  current conditions
• You dont want to get into a situation where the
  site visitor is threatened or feels compelled to
  justify or defend the visit or the findings

32
6. Exit Conference

• Express thanks for hospitality/cooperation
• Review accreditation timeline again
• Share the findings and conclusions in the draft
  of the site visit report
• Answer questions and provide clarification
  regarding findings and conclusions
• Give an opportunity to clarify or rebut initial
  findings and conclusions

33
7. Optional Post Exit Conference

• Visitation team will meet with the PD and other
  appropriate individuals as designated by the PD
• Findings from the on-site visit should be
  discussed in more detail, determining how to
  correct deficiencies

34
IV. The Report

• A. Components of the Report
• B. Writing the Report
• C. Submitting the Report

35
A. Components of the Report

• Title Page
• Table of Contents
• Brief Institution Overview
• List of individuals interviewed
• Introduction
• Clinical Experience
• Research Experience
• Curriculum
• Summary and Recommendations

36
B. Writing the Report

• The institutional and program descriptions can be
  taken directly from the self-study if confirmed
• A list of all personnel interviewed should
  maintained throughout the site visit
• Work sessions should be utilized to begin
  identifying and formulating program strengths,
  recommendations, and violations
• Prior to the final exit meeting a draft of the
  strengths, recommendations, and violations should
  be completed
• The report should be finalized as soon as
  possible after the site visit to ensure retention
  of the information

37
C. Submitting the Report

• Once both site visitation officers have reviewed,
  approved, and signed the report, the Chief
  Evaluation Officer should submit the final report
  to the Chair of the GRC

38
V. The Accreditation Decision Process

• After receiving the report, the Chair of the GRC
  will send a copy to institution representatives
• The institution will then respond to the report
  providing clarification or a plan for change if
  necessary.
• After review of the rejoinder, the Chair of the
  GRC meets via conference call or in person to
  review the institutional response with the
  committee

39
The Accreditation Decision Process cont.

• Following committee review a letter is drafted to
  the Reviewed Institution disclosing deficiencies,
  recommendations and the action of accreditation
  (full or partial term) and/or withholding of
  accreditation
• As a site visitor you will likely be contacted by
  the Chair of the GRC to provide clarification and
  background information regarding the contents of
  the report.

40
VI. Common Areas of Concern and Scenarios

• Dynamics between Site Visitors and Institution
• Clarification of the written report
• Relationship between the visitors
• Exit Conference Guidelines
• Others?

41
Dynamics

• The Site Visitor(s) must be cognizant that they
  are representing the Graduate Review Committee
  and the NATA.
• The interaction between the Chair of the Site
  Visit and the team member should be
  professionally sound. If there are situations
  where a member of the Site Visit feels s/he was
  treated unfairly or not given due respect, then
  the Site Visitor should report to the Chair of
  the GRC

42
Dynamics

• By agreeing to sign the Site Visitation document,
  the site Reviewers are verifying that they agree
  with the recommendations/deficiencies. Any
  disagreements should be brought to the attention
  of the Chair of the GRC.

43
Dynamics

• Act as Fact Verifiers not Critical Proclaimers

44
Scenario 1
45
Comments?

• Additional Requests/Information?