Margie Crutchfield

1
Lead Reviewer Workshop

• Welcome!
• Margie Crutchfield
• Associate Vice President, Program Review
• margie_at_ncate.org
• Please remember to set-up your audio
• Go to tools, then audio, then audio set-up
  wizard
• For those of you who have a microphone, we will
  do a microphone sound check one by one,
  starting at 130
• 330 pm - First audio sound check
• 345 pm Second audio sound check
• 355 pm - Final audio sound check
• 400pm - Session will begin

2
Session Agenda

• Eluminate Product Features
• Lead Reviewer Responsibilities
• Data Rule for this semester
• Linkinga new feature in PRS
• Q and A
• PRS Overview

3
(No Transcript)
4
A Question

• Is this your first time as a lead reviewer?
• Click on the green check mark if yes

5
Roles and Responsibilities of the Lead Reviewer
6
Lead Role

• Facilitate communication
• Establish the work schedule (timelines)
• Be knowledgeable about SPA standards/ report
  format
• Solicit contributions from all team members
• Write/ post the final review

7
Communicating With Your Team

• Email from NCATE team members
• Initiate contact
• Email/ Phone
• Conference Call Capability (instructions included
  in your assignment e-mail)

8

• Suggestion
• 3 stage communication points
• initial- Establish the schedule
• middle- Discuss the report findings
• final- Consensus building for final report

9

• Encourage collaboration!
• But what if

10
Establishing the Work Schedule

• T I M E L I N E S !
• Remember there is now an official second
  spring cycle S09-2

11
TIMELINE SUMMARY
Institution deadline SPA
deadline Review Team Audit
Team Spring 1 2/1 3/1 4/1
6/1 Spring 2 4/15 4/30 6/15
7/15

12
NCATE Deadline

• Final Posting to Institution
• Spring 09-1 7/15
• Spring 09-2 9/1

13
The Final Review

• Be sure that all members have composed and posted
  individual reports (even if they are not complete
  reports)
• Be sure that all members have contributed to the
  final report

14

• Lead reviewers must post the final team
  recognition report.
• This final report will be reviewed by the audit
  team.
• The audit teams report will be posted in PRS
  for you and your team to see

15
Update on Program Review

• Data Rule For Spring 09
• Two years of data for all assessments (with
  understanding of programs context)
• If a key assessment is in a course that is taught
  once a year then one year of data one semester
  of data
• If program is brand new or going through program
  review for the very first time, one year of data
  is required

16

• Some items to note

17
Important Reminders

• You must have Version 7 or higher of Adobe
  Acrobat Readerfree download available on PRS
• Mac usersmake sure you review the document on
  the PRS log-in page

18
Making Decisions on Standards

• Each standard Met, Met with Conditions (except
  for NCTM and NASP), or Not Met
• If standard is Met, you are not required to fill
  in Comment section
• If standard is Not Met or MET with Conditions,
  you MUST include a comment

19
Making Final Decision

• Follow your SPAs decision rule
• Does the program have in place a series of 6 to 8
  key assessments that taken as a whole show
  candidate mastery of the SPA standards?
• Do candidates perform appropriately on those
  assessments?

20
Making the Final Decision

• Follow your SPAs decision rule
• But in general

21

• Recognized
• Program isnt perfect, but is well on its way,
  understands performance assessments, alignment of
  standards and assessments, etc.
• Recognized with condition
• Program understands performance assessment and
  alignment, but may have some serious deficiencies
  in some scoring guides and/or some assessments
• May not have sufficient data

22

• Further development required/recognized with
  probation/not recognized
• NCATE staff will determine which of the above
  applied
• Program really misses the mark, little or no
  alignment of the standards and the assessments

23

• If the decision is National Recognition with
  Conditions

24

• THE CONDITIONS BOX
• MUST BE FILLED OUT

25
Linking

• Programs that have identical assessments but have
  some significant difference (degree level, etc)
• Must have a shell in PRS for each program but
  these can be linked (as evidenced by the color
  coding)

26
(No Transcript)
27

• Compilers submit all information in first report
  and submit it.
• When they open second (and subsequent) linked
  reports all information and attachments from the
  first report is copied into the second report.
• The compiler changes any pertinent information on
  the second report and submits it.

28
Reviewers do the same

• Open up the first report, evaluate the report.
• Open the first recognition report template, input
  text and information for all programs.
• Submit the first report.
• Open the second recognition report, change
  information on the cover sheet and submit the
  report.

29
Timeliness

• For the last three semester 95 of all reports
  were returned to the institutions on the posted
  deadline (hooray!!!!-----and Thank YOU!!!!!)

30
Approval Rates, Initial Submissions
R Nationally Recognized, C Nationally
Recognized with Conditions
31
Approval Rates, Rev/RC reports
Rev Revised Reports, RC Response to
Conditions Reports R Nationally Recognized, C
Nationally Recognized with Conditions
32
Approval Rates, Initial Reports
33
Initial (cont.)
34
Initial (cont.)
35
Approval Rates, Rev. and Cond.
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
What are we working on?

• SASB Task Force on SPA Standards
• Streamlining Initiatives
• Adding Options for Program Review

39
Task Force to look at SPA standards

• SPA standards are very diverse
• In number, organization, specificity
• In coverage of content and pedagogy
• Task Force has developed a set of 4
  guiding/organizing principles
• Next meeting is later in March it is expected
  that a draft will be posted on the web in late
  April for public comment

40
Current Streamlining Changes
41
Middle level programs

• Change in policy for review of true middle level
  programs
• Must meet criteria for middle level programs
• Programs submit one report to NMSA
• 80 of candidates must pass state test in content
  areas
• Secondary program must reach national recognition
• If not secondary program, state must review
  content preparation program

42
Programs in secondary content areas that do not
provide content preparation

• This year NCATE will develop option for these
  programs
• During this year, these programs can defer review
  until NCATE develops process and they have time
  to implement
• Programs will not address SPA standards, they
  will address a generic set of standards (Task
  Force principles?)
• Will submit one report
• Will be expected to have assessments
  demonstrating candidate competence

43
Streamline current program report

• Possible options
• Section I Question 1 to be answered if needed
  delete questions 3, 4, and 5 delete faculty
  information other deletions are under
  consideration.
• Section II Flexibility to consolidate some
  assessments.
• Section IV Condense and clarify instructions
• Section V Move to unit review?

44

• Decrease required amount of data
• 1 to 2 years?
• Investigate strategies for reviewing programs
  with extremely low enrollments

45
Potential Options for Program Review

• Current process will still remain an option!!!!!!

46
Options for Initial Review

• Allow institutions to choose all of their own
  assessments (with some constraints)
• No more than 8
• Must submit state test data
• Must demonstrate content, pedagogical content
  knowledge and skills, and impact on student
  learning
• SPAs develop set of pre-approved assessments

47
Options for continuing review

• Reduce requirements for continuing national
  recognition so that only new assessments need to
  be approved and minimal data provided.
• Focus on what is now Section Vself study and
  continuous improvement
• Permit an institution to conduct validity studies
  of its assessments in lieu of other program
  report evidence requirements

48
We need your feedback!!!

• Draft of proposal will be posted to the NCATE web
  site in mid-March for public comment
• You will receive an email with information and
  instructions on how to respond
• Please read the information and give us your
  feedback quickly

49
Lead Reviewers and PRS
50
Logging into PRS

• To get started you will need to follow these
  steps
• Step 1. Go to the URL http//aims.ncate.org,
  click on PRS
• Step 2. Enter your ID (e-mail)
• Step 3. Enter your password

51

• When you go to the URL,
• you will see the log-in screen

52
(No Transcript)
53
(No Transcript)
54

• Once in the site
• You will see your name and program assignments

55
(No Transcript)
56
Some reminders

• Access Program Report from the institution
• Click on PDF icon in the column labeled Program
  Review/Current
• Access SPA Program Recognition Report template
• PRS (template is retrieved by clicking on the
  pen icon under lead reviewer for the assignment
  and is entered entirely on-line (content is
  exactly the same)
• Submit the completed SPA Program Recognition
  Report
• PRS--- continue to click next until you get
  to the submission page, then simply click submit

57

• Lead reviewers must complete a final report
  which brings together the findings of all team
  members
• Options
• Brand new report (you probably wont do this)
• Cloning Feature

58
(No Transcript)
59
Resources on NCATE web site

• www.ncate.org, click on Program Reviewers
• Program Report Forms
• Guidelines, Instructions
• Archived Web Seminars
• Mini-videos on how to use PRS
• Updated last semester
• Added new ones
• Lead reviewers
• Audit Team
• Linking

60
(No Transcript)
61
(No Transcript)
62
Q A
To pose a question Click hand
icon Push microphone icon to begin and
end audio Please state name and SPA
affiliation Questions will be taken in
the order they are received
63
NCATE Contact Info

• Sabata Morris
• Accreditation Associate
• Program Review
• Sabata_at_ncate.org
• Monique Thomason
• Accreditation Assistant, Program Review
• monique_at_ncate.org

Margie Crutchfield Associate Vice President
Program Review margie_at_ncate.org Robin
Marion Accreditation Associate Program
Review robin_at_ncate.org