NCATE Professional Development WebConference Series for Program Review

1
NCATE Professional Development
Web-Conference Seriesfor Program Review

• New First Time Program Reviewers Workshop for
  the Spring 2007 Review Cycle
• Process and Guidelines for Your First Review
• Deidre Alves M.Ed.
• February 15 16, 2007

2
Welcome New Reviewers!

• please remember to set up your audio
• 145pm- First audio sound check
• 155pm- Final audio sound check
• 200pm- Session will begin

3
Before we begin

• Features to help you become an active
• participant in todays conference

4
Introduction to Features on Elluminate

• Polling feature
• Synchronous text message feature
• On-air feature

5
Interactive Icons
6
(No Transcript)
7

• Modeling interaction with a participant

8
Session Agenda
1. Conference Goals 2. Materials at My
Fingertips 3. An important note 4. Electronic
Retrieval and Posting Process Current
System PRS 5. The Program Recognition Report
Template 6. The Decision 7. Program and Unit
Relationship 8. Communication with Your Team
9. Timelines and the rolling review 10. Q
A 11. Upcoming Web-Events 12. Conclusion
9
Conference Goals

• to provide information on how to evaluate and
  submit final recognition reports
• to provide professional development training to
  serve the needs of new/first time program
  reviewers

10
Materials at My Fingertips

• ? www.ncate.org (Program Reviewers)
• ? NCATE Guidelines for Reviewers
• ? NCATE Guidelines for Electronic Submission
• ? SPA Template
• ? SPA Worksheets (where applicable)
• ? WebCast Archive
• http//www.ncate.org/programreview/progRevWebConf
  erences.asp?ch37

11
An Important Note
NCATE launches a new system interface
-(PRS)- Spring 2007
12

• PRS
• Program Review System

13

• PRS URL
• http//prs.ncate.org

14

• This semester
• NCATE will utilize both the current system and
  the PRS

15

• This will be the LAST semester utilizing our
  current system as PRS becomes the official
  interface for all reviews beginning Fall 2007

16
Electronic Retrieval and Posting Process

• I have been assigned a review
• now what?

17

• Regardless of which system you will use (current
  or PRS), you will first need to access the
  password protected site and log-in
• All reviewers will be notified which system to
  use, teams will be kept together
• throughout the process
• URL
• ID
• PASSWORD

18
URL

• URL (current system)
• http//notes.ncate.org/progrev/progreports07.nsf
• URL (PRS)
• http//prs.ncate.org

19
ID PASSWORD

• ID and PASSWORD
• Sent via email

20

• Once in the site (current or PRS)
• You will see your name and program assignments

21

• The log-in screen for the current system will
  look like this

22
(No Transcript)
23

• The log-in screen for the PRS will look like this

24
(No Transcript)
25

• After log-in on the current system you will see
  your assignments listed as follows

26
(No Transcript)
27

• On the PRS, it will look like this

28
(No Transcript)
29
Advantages of PRS On-line application Field
sensitive User-friendly Character
counts Streamlined Feedback email loop
30

• Simple steps
• The overall process function for reviewers is
  basically the same (current system or PRS)
• Retrieve Program Report from the institution on
  your list on the site (PRS or current)
• Access SPA Program Recognition Report template on
  the NCATE site (save to desktop) for Current
  System only---on the PRS, the template is
  automatically located right next to your
  assignment and information is entered entirely
  on-line (content is exactly the same)
• Submit the completed SPA Program Recognition
  Report with decision by attaching to the site for
  current system only--- on PRS simply click submit

31

• Application sharing-
• We are going to walk you through a live demo
  to review the process of accessing the Program
  Report and then submitting your Program
  Recognition Report
• Site application
• Locating the template

32

• We will first walk you through the process using
  the current system

33

• And then walk you through the process using PRS

34

• Lets go to the current system

35

• Some items to note

36

• All reviewers on the team should complete
  individual reports and contribute to the final
  report

37

• If the report requires revision by the
  institution in the next semester, the same team
  is assigned (based on availability)

38

• If assigned a revised report
• The Program Report and SPA Recognition Report
  have been made available at

39

• URL (old archived reports)
• http//notes.ncate.org/progrev/progreportf05.nsf
• -or-
• http//notes.ncate.org/progrev/progreports05.nsf
• -or-
• http//notes.ncate.org/progrev/progreports06.nsf
• -or-
• http//notes.ncate.org/progrev/progreportf06.nsf

40

• We have talked about the PROCESS of retrieval of
  the Program Report and submission of the Program
  Recognition Report on the 2 systems (current
  PRS)

41

• Now
• lets talk about the CONTENT of the Program
  Recognition Report
• This will apply to both PRS and Current System

42

• Program Report
• vs.
• Program Recognition Report

43
The SPA Program Recognition Report Template

• Recognition Templates are available in 3 places
• 1. www.ncate.org
• (click program reviewers then resources
  for reviewing)
• 2. Current system help documents
• 3. PRS next to program assignments---automatic
  on-line prompted
  responses
• Template format is consistent across SPAs

44

• One of the major differences between the current
  system the PRS is that

45

• On the current system, you need to retrieve the
  template, compose (save to desktop), and then
  attach
• On PRS, you enter the information directly onto
  the template through on-line prompts and hit
  submit

46

• The content of the template is exactly the same

47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
(No Transcript)
53
(No Transcript)
54
(No Transcript)
55
The Decision

• Program Report Decisions
• Nationally Recognized
• Nationally Recognized w/Conditions
• Not Nationally Recognized

56

• Key points to remember
• Sections A-G
• Data
• Standards
• Assessments (narrative, scoring guide (rubric)
• Alignment (standards, assessments, scoring guide,
  data)
• Tone

57

• Assessments should bring to life the
  standards---standards in action
• Standards should not decorate the assessment

58

• SPA reviewers will make one of the following
  decisions based on your program report
• The program is nationally recognized.
• The program is nationally recognized with
  conditions.
• Insufficient data
• Insufficient alignment
• Poor assessment, scoring guides, etc
• 80 rule (footnoted on the template)
• Conditions box MUST be filled out
• The program is not nationally recognized a new
  program report may be submitted.

59

• Data Rule
• Until Spring 07, the following rule will apply
  If the program has at least one semesters data
  on at least five assessments and everything else
  is appropriate then a reviewer can recognize the
  program.
• If less than five then the reviewer should
  recognize with conditions.

60
A note about tone

• Reviewer attitude in report decisions is
  critical---
• Remember that you want to be as helpful as
  possible to the institutionstating the problem
  in clear objective languageavoid a God-like tone

61

• Reviewers are asked to accept the integrity of
  the program and review it for the purpose of
  determining if the information submitted meets
  the SPA standards
• Do not try to redesign the programs
• Objectively evaluate the QUALITY of the
  performance assessments and rubrics with respect
  to the alignment w/ SPA standards
• POSITIVE PERSPECTIVE
• Should include strengths and weaknesses
• Adapted from IRA- Guidelines for IRA/NCATE
  Program Reviewers October 4, 2006

62

• The BIG question!

63

• DOES THIS PROGRAM MEET THE STANDARDS
• ?

64
Program and Unit Relationship

• How does my Program Recognition Decision fit
  into the Accreditation Process?

65

• The BOE (Board of Examiners)-
• will use these final report findings (across
  programs) at an institution to evaluate whether
  NCATE Standard 1 and 2 have been met

66
Communication With Your Team

• Lead makes contact
• Team sets work schedule
• Conference call capability

67
Timelines
The Rolling Review Institution deadline
SPA deadline Review Team Audit
Team Initial reports 2/1 4/1 6/1
Revised reports 4/15 6/1 7/1 Late
Revised Reports 5/15 7/1
8/1
68
NCATE Deadline

• Final Posting to Institution
• By 6/30 Initial Submissions
• By 7/31 Revised Submissions
• By 9/1 Latest Revised Submissions

69
Q A
To pose a question Click hand
icon Push mic icon to begin and end
audio Please state name and SPA
affiliation Questions will be taken in
the order they are received
70
Update on Resources
Web-Conference Archive http//www.ncate.
org/programreview/progRevWebConferences.asp?ch37

71

• Next Professional Development Web Event
• March 2, 2007 at 200pm (eastern)
• Experienced Current Program Reviewers Workshop
• Process and Guidelines for the Spring 2007 Cycle

72
Reflection

• After attending this conference, participants
  recognize
• Interface differences --- current PRS
• Log-in and assignment retrieval procedures (both
  systems)
• Program Report -vs- Program Recognition Report
• Locating the Program Recognition Template
• Program Recognition Report content
• Program Evaluation
• Submitting the Decision

73
BRIEF SURVEY

• A- Extremely
• B.-Somewhat
• C- Not at all
• 1. Overall, how helpful was the Elluminate Web
  Conference Presentation?
• 2. How useful was the Eluminate Web conference
  product?
• 3. How clear was the information presented at the
  Web conference?
• 4. How comfortable do you feel with the NCATE
  Reviewer process after attending the conference?
• 5. How organized was the correspondence in
  getting you ready to attend the conference
  (emails, e-flyers, confirmations, configuration
  information)?

74
Program Review Staff

• Margie Crutchfield Ph.D.
• Associate Vice President, Program Review
• Deidre Alves M.Ed.
• Accreditation Associate, Program Review
• Jaye Bishop
• Accreditation Associate, Program Review
• Monique Thomason, Accreditation Assistant,
  Program Review