Council For The Accreditation Of Educator Preparation Research Articles

Evidence-based inquiry cycle: A model for meeting the council for the accreditation of educator preparation standard 5

This article outlines the need for support and best practices for educator preparation providers (EPPs) to meet the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) standards, specifically, CAEP’s Standard Component 5.1 Quality Assurance System. The purpose of this article was to identify a continuous improvement model that EPPs can be utilized to support quality assurance processes in meeting CAEP Standard Component 5. The article used a secondary analysis methodology to examine past theories, models and research to outline best practices for EPPs. The findings provided a strong case for teacher education programs to utilize an evidence-based inquiry cycle for the foundation of their quality assurance systems and positive change in general. Additionally, best practices were identified to aid in maintaining such a system including support for providers, collaboration with stakeholders, an emphasis on positive culture, and a focus on quality outcomes and data. This article has implications not only for EPPs but for other providers focusing on quality assurance measures that should be supported through inquiry, strong evidence, and continuous improvement efforts. A practical recommendation of this study is that EPPs should use an evidence-based inquiry cycle to assist in developing, implementing, and modifying each provider’s quality assurance system to better serve their candidates.

Degree of Application of the Faculty of Educational Sciences at the University of Jordan of International Accreditation Standards (CAEP) and its Relation to the Quality of Educational Service

The study aims to explore the degree of application of the Faculty of Educational Sciences at the University of Jordan to the international accreditation standards from the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) and its relationship to the quality of educational service. The study members, purposefully selected, are all 85 faculty members at the Faculty of Educational Sciences at the University of Jordan. To achieve the objectives of the study, a descriptive and analytical approach is used. The study instruments are electronically prepared, developed, and distributed during the second semester of the academic year 2019/2020, where the number of respondents to the two study instruments is (77) faculty members. The study concludes that the degree of application of the Faculty of Educational Sciences to the international accreditation standards from the viewpoint of faculty members is medium. The results also show that there is a positive relationship between the degree of applying the international accreditation standards and the degree of quality of educational service from the viewpoint of faculty members. For the Faculty of Educational Sciences at the University of Jordan to attain international accreditation standards and based on the results of the study, the researcher recommends the necessity of evaluating and developing the Faculty’s programs for continuous improvement following methodological foundations and scientific models and through cooperation with target groups, including graduates, employers, and employees in the educational sector.

Internationalization and CAEP accreditation: replicating US teacher education programs abroad

ABSTRACT The Internationalization of Higher Education has led to uneasiness among non-US universities about their international reputation, ranking, and local legitimacy generating a growing interest in US accreditation. Specifically, non-US Colleges of Education pursue accreditation through the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) to validate program quality, obtain positive recognition, and gain perceived benefits. This essay contends that under the facades of internationalization and quality assurance, CAEP uses four approaches to internationalization to replicate US teacher education programs outside US borders. The process legitimizes particular educational practices while simultaneously delegitimizing and rejecting local practices establishing teacher education programs that look and perform similar to US programs designed for an American setting. Discussion is provided that advances the conversation about IHE and accreditation including the unique consequences that emerge for non-US teacher education programs and the indigenous people and culture.

Identifying administrators’ and faculty’s perspectives regarding CAEP accreditation in a College of Education: A Q methodology research

In higher education, accreditation involves an external quality review process that scrutinizes universities, colleges, and educational programs to ensure that the education provided meets acceptable quality levels. Often considered the gold standard for institutions, the accreditation process originated in the US and quickly moved beyond American borders. Specifically, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) has moved to provide ‘legitimacy’ to universities in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region. Using Q methodology, this study examines faculty and administrators' perceptions regarding CAEP accreditation of a College of Education (CED) in the GCC. The results identify an apparent discrepancy among participants’ perceptions regarding the CAEP accreditation’s advantages and disadvantages, procedures and requirements, and impact on faculty and administrators’ workload and agency.

Physical Education Teacher Education Student Teaching Placement Procedures: A Descriptive Analysis

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to describe the placement procedures of physical education teacher education (PETE) programs in the United States. Participants were active 4-year traditional baccalaureate programs at state universities within the United States who were accredited by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). Of the 100 institutions invited to participate, 40 PETE programs completed the questionnaire. Participants reported the majority of their programs (62.5%) were organized under the college of education while 37.5% reported being organized under other colleges. No program reported being organized as a singular college. The median and mode for teacher candidates undergoing student teaching in the winter 2016 semester was 8. The majority of programs (92.5%) reported student teaching being one semester only and 80% reporting two or more cooperating teachers being utilized during that time. When asked who selected student teaching placements, 22.5% of programs reported the college of education alone, 45% reported the college of education with PETE faculty input, 27.5% reported PETE faculty, and 5% reported other. Congruency between the preparation program and the placement site was the most frequently reported factor when selecting a student teaching site, followed by availability of the cooperating teacher, and then by particular cooperating teacher qualities. No correlation was found between governance structure, placement official, or primary factor for placement selection.

Evaluation of the Master of curriculum and science instruction in Taibah University in the light of (CAEP) Standards: تقويم برنامج ماجستير مناهج وطرق تدريس العلوم بجامعة طيبة في ضوء معايير (CAEP)

This study aimed to evaluate the master program of curriculum and science instruction in Taibah University in the light of the standards of council for the accreditation of educator preparation (CAEP). To achieve that, the study applied a questionnaire on the research population that consisted of all the faculty members (7) in the curriculum and science instruction specialty. And all the students (7) in the curriculum and science instruction specialty. The questioner consisted of (32) items distributed on the (CAEP) five standards: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge, Clinical Partnerships and Practice, Candidate Quality and Selectivity, Program Impact, Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement. The results showed that (CAEP) standards are highly available in the program with an average of (3.46) where: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge comes first with an average of (3.67) then Candidate Quality and Selectivity (3.51), Program Impact (3.45), Clinical Partnerships and Practice (3.41), and they all were highly available. And in the last place Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement (3.08) with a medium availability in the program. And the results showed that There were no significant differences at the level of significance(α≤0.05) between the faculty members and students responds of (CAEP) standards availability in the program. The study recommended prepare the curriculum and science instruction specialty to import (CAEP) standards. and perform more studies about (CAEP) standards.

From Mediated Fieldwork to Co-Constructed Partnerships: A Framework for Guiding and Reflecting on P-12 School–University Partnerships

An essential component of teacher preparation is clinical practice that allows teacher candidates (TCs) to observe, reflect upon, test their ideas, and adjust and improve their methods in classrooms. Weaknesses in the structure and organization between coursework and clinical practice in teacher preparation programs often present barriers from fully achieving these goals. University–school partnerships have the potential to overcome these challenges and create spaces for mutually beneficial learning opportunities for all stakeholders. In this article, we identify six levels to illustrate the continua of work with schools in the preparation of TCs that describe how a program might move from current partnership practice to the kinds of partnership practice described by McDonald and colleagues and the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). While developing partnerships with schools is work that has inherent challenges, the potential of this work to meaningfully transform the preparation of teachers is crucial.

تقویم برنامج التدریب المیدانی فی مجال صعوبات التعلم فی جامعة نجران فی ضوء معاییر مجلس اعتماد تعلیم المعلمینCAEP Evaluation Field of Training Program in Learning Disabilities in the Light of Standards of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) at Najran University

هدفت الدراسة الحالية إلى معرفة مستوى تقويم برنامج التدريب الميداني في مجال صعوبات التعلم بجامعة نجران في ضوء معايير مجلس اعتماد تعليم المعلمين Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) والاختلاف فيها وفقا لمتغيري المقيم والجنس، وتکونت عينة الدراسة من (45) فردا منهم (12) مشرفا ومشرفة من المشرفين الأکاديميين على التدريب الميداني و(33) طالبا معلما وطالبة معلمة في قسم التربية الخاصة بجامعة نجران . تم اختيارهم بالطريقة القصدية. واستخدمت الاستبانة في عملية جمع البيانات. وأظهرت النتائج أن درجة تقويم برنامج التدريب الميداني في مجال صعوبات التعلم بجامعة نجران في ضوء معايير مجلس اعتماد تعليم المعلمين (CAEP) جاء بدرجة تقدير کبيرة، وکشفت النتائج عن وجود فروق ذات دلالة إحصائية في تقويم برنامج التدريب الميداني في مجال صعوبات التعلم بجامعة نجران في ضوء معايير مجلس اعتماد تعليم المعلمين (CAEP) حسب متغير الجنس على جميع المعايير وعلى الأداة ککل لصالح الإناث، باستثناء مجال (قائد المدرسة) من المعيار الثاني ومجال (النمو المهني والممارسة الأخلاقية) من المعيار الثالث لم تظهر عليهما فروقا دالة إحصائيا. في حين لم تظهر فروقا إحصائية في متغير المقيم، وأوصت الدراسة بعدة توصيات. The study being dealt with aims at edging closer to grasping the assessment of how far the field training programis gauged within the realm of the learning disabilities specifically in Najran University in the light of the CAEP standards (Council for the accreditation of Educator Preparation)and the difference latent within in accordance with the and gender variables which are added to envisaging prospective overtures for the development of field training program .of relevance, the study subjects were made up of 45 individuals among whom were 12 male and female academic supervisors who are stinted with the field training and the remainder were 33 teaching female and male students at the faculty of special education in Najran university. who were selected according to the purposive sampling subjectively with adoption of the questionnaire technique while collecting the data . No less important, the findings were reported to elaborate that the extent to which the field training program assessment within the confines of learning disabilities in Najran University was overwhelmingly working out splendidly in the light of CAEP standards Eventually, the conclusions unveiled that there are statistical differences on assessing the field training program within the confines of learning disabilities in Najran University exactly as derived from CAEP standards which were gender on all variables but tilting towards the females within the context of the tool as a whole to the exclusion of the field (5) of the second criterion, but the field (5) of the third criterion was not symptomatic of statistical differences. On the other hand, there were not statistical differences as regards the evaluator variable .

تقويم برنامج التدريب الميداني في مجال صعوبات التعلم في جامعة نجران في ضوء معايير مجلس اعتماد تعليم المعلمين CAEP = Evaluation Field of Training Program in Learning Disabilities in the Light of Standards of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) at Najran University

تقويم | برنامج التدريب الميداني | صعوبات التعلم | جامعة نجران | المعايير العالمية | مجلس اعتماد تعليم المعلمين | Assessment | Field Training Program | Learning Disabilities | Najran University | International Standards | CAEP

Program Innovation and Design in an Era of Accountability: EdD Faculty Work as a Community of Practice

The essay describes how a task team of Drexel EdD faculty worked as a community of practice (Wenger, 1998) to conduct a crosswalk to align program principles, known as the Keystones, with national and university standards including the six Guiding Principles for Program Design contained in the CPED Framework (Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate, n.d.-a). In accordance with the study institution’s planning tool, the EdD crosswalk also demonstrates alignment with the National Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Advanced Program Standards (Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, n.d.-a), Drexel University Student Learning Priorities (DSLPs), and Drexel School of Education Program Themes. Discussion examining the task team’s work is framed around the four interlinking components of community of practice: meaning, practice, community, and identity. Wenger (1998) describes these components as “deeply interconnected and mutually defining” (p. 5). While uncommon, the process described in this essay represents the intent of assessment scholars (Banta & Palomba, 2014) and contributes to deepening understanding of higher education assessment work.

The Preparation and Education of First-Year Teachers: A Case Study

The purpose of this case study was to provide a policy analysis of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) standard that requires teacher preparation programs to follow their recent graduates during their first years of teaching to demonstrate their positive impact on student growth, satisfaction with their preparation, and effective teaching practices. Using the Colorado Teacher Quality Standards as a conceptual framework, this qualitative study used interviews and observations at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year to discover five first-year teachers’ perceptions of their preparation, needs, level of confidence in all areas of teaching, and the ways in which they could have been better or more prepared for the classroom. Their annual teacher evaluations provided insight to their evidence of effective teaching and impact on student growth. Overall, the first-year teachers felt prepared for their first year of teaching and demonstrated effective teaching strategies, but they needed more training on meeting the needs of students with diverse abilities, as well as how to successfully implement curriculum. Their greatest success during the year was experiencing student growth.

Online Teaching Module: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Key Assessment Example

Online Teaching Module: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Key Assessment Example

“Quality Leadership Matters”: A Research-Based Survey of Graduate Programming

This empirical study contributes to the dialogue about quality leadership and national trends involving standards-based program review. It is the first to utilize the 2016 Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standards for graduate programs and separately from accreditation and sponsorship. The literature on quality leadership is reviewed, and results from an original instrument are described. Survey influences included leadership literature, the CAEP Standards, and the University Council for Educational Administration’s artifacts. Students and completers’ feedback was on program effectiveness, satisfaction, impact, and ethics. Variance was found in perceptions of quality, relevance, and learning. Contradictory beliefs of program effectiveness can stimulate discussion and strengthen programming.

How Teacher Education Can Elevate Teacher Quality: Evidence From Research

The set of papers in this issue of Journal of Teacher Education (JTE) is particularly timely, as it represents research that speaks directly to current issues of importance to diverse teacher education stakeholders. These stakeholders include, among others, university leaders, teacher educators, teacher preparation and professional development program designers, and policy makers. These papers touch on policies and practices intended to increase the quality of the teaching force, presenting evidence and analyses and highlighting the consequences of decisions about the design of systems for initial and continuing education of teachers. The collection is also significant in spanning the continuum of issues in teacher education, from assessments used for admission and graduation, to the nature and quality of professional support for beginning and experienced educators. The papers also represent a range of methodological approaches--quantitative, qualitative, and conceptual. In this editorial, we will consider the highlights and significance of each of these papers in turn. Evaluation of the quality of teacher preparation programs has long been an important policy topic. The United States, along with many other countries, has multiple systems for evaluating programs, with varying purposes, methods, and audiences (Feuer, Floden, Chudowsky, & Ahn, 2013). National systems of program accreditation have gained prominence, especially as many states have begun to require national accreditation. As two competing systems merged to form the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), a new set of standards were established. Key questions for policy and practice are what these standards should be and what evidence supports them. For the new CAEP standards, much debate has focused on what admission requirements should be for educator preparation programs. On its face, it seems reasonable to insist that programs restrict entry to those students likely to become high-quality teachers. An unintended consequence of using measures such as scores on college entry exams, however, may be the disproportionate effect on minority-serving institutions of higher education and the reduction in the numbers of graduates of color, just as the nation is calling for more teachers from underrepresented groups. Decisions about whether high entrance standards are, on balance, desirable should be informed by evidence on whether meeting such an entrance requirement is indeed necessary for becoming a high-quality teacher. Program representatives might also argue that, when they admit students with low college entry exam scores, they recognize that they will need to address weaknesses in content knowledge, and that they are committed to removing such weaknesses before recommending candidates for certification. What would be the problem, they might say, with admitting students with low entry scores, provided that they ensure that they have the necessary knowledge and skills before they are certified? The paper by Evans in this issue of the journal provides evidence to inform this debate about the CAEP standard concerning admissions requirements. Her paper addresses the degree to which measures used in making admissions decisions are predictive of prospective teachers' success, finding little evidence for some measures, but moderate predictive power for graduate grade point average (GPA). Another of her analyses reveals that setting high admission standards would have significant impact on enrollments in minority-serving programs, raising critical questions about their longterm sustainability. Current demands in the field require attention not only to program admission requirements but also to assessments candidates must undergo at the end of their program. The recent move toward performance assessments as uniform exit requirements has the potential to shift priorities away from what teachers know on paper-and-pencil licensure exams toward how they enact practices in context. …

Implications for educator preparation programs considering competency‐based education

Implications for educator preparation programs considering competency‐based education

One for All and All for One

The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standards requires educator preparation programs (EPPs) to ensure instruments used to assess their candidates are both valid and reliable. Due to size and limited financial resources, this task may be challenging for some EPPs. In an effort to address CAEP’s expectations, 26 EPPs in one state formed a collaboration to develop and implement an instrument for use during student teaching, and then conducted analyses of its data to determine the validity and reliability. This article uses a case study methodology to investigate the EPPs’ motivations for participating in the collaboration, and the benefits, challenges, and learning that resulted from participation. The findings, principally related to aspects of individual program improvement, have implications not only for EPPs pursuing CAEP accreditation but also for any higher education institutions interested in collaborative assessment development.

The Research We Need in Teacher Education

Prompted by internal and external criticism, demands for accountability, and an authentic desire to better understand processes associated with learning to teach, the field of teacher education--and more specifically, of teacher preparation--is experiencing a vigorous period of change. In some cases, this has resulted in innovations--such as current proposals to evaluate and regulate teacher education and preparation programs, reform of the requirements to attain qualified teacher status (QTS), and the creation of systems for evaluating teacher effectiveness--that have been enacted without evidence of potential effectiveness. In addition, because different communities or networks operate using different rules and instruments to achieve intended goals, a persistent problem with respect to teacher education policy and practice is a lack of coherence leading to in the system. For instance, in the United States alone, a number of complex networks shape policy and practice in teacher education; these include, but are not limited to, university and non-university-based teacher educators, schools' policies and practices, including mentoring and induction, educational researchers with diverse scholarly backgrounds (e.g., political science, economics), accreditation agencies such as Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), regulatory agencies at the local and federal levels such as the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE), and private advocacy groups such as the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ). The resolution of that have emerged out of raising and addressing policy and practice questions in teacher education has in some cases served to move the field forward, but in other cases, has done just the opposite. An international case in point is in England, where the Department for Education has introduced a proposal to reform the current Qualified Teacher Status which, if implemented, would effectively transfer the responsibility to judge when a teacher is qualified from university-based teacher education to the school's headmaster after first undergoing a significant period of school teaching. In some cases, these are far from resolution as advances in related areas of knowledge and practice (e.g., cognitive science) have revealed the enormous complexity inherent in teaching and in learning to teach. These findings bring into question traditional ways of knowing in teacher education as well as current notions of what it means to be an effective teacher and by extension, what constitutes an effective teacher education/preparation program. The role of research at this moment has never been more important as a vehicle that can facilitate learning by examining and reflecting on the construction and resolution of continuously evolving contradictions (Engestrom, 1987, p. 79). Contradictions in Teacher Education and the Role of Research Globally and from a cultural and historical standpoint, teacher education has often involved the resolution of created by questioning, implementing, and reflecting on the system. The most prominent of these are what the goals and purposes of teacher education should be, who should teach and what should teachers know and be able to do, where and how should teachers be prepared, and how quality can be secured, evaluated, and reported. In the sections that follow, each of these issues is unpacked with respect to the need for research evidence to inform policy and practice directed at improving the preparation and ongoing development of effective teachers. What Should Be the Goals of Teacher Education? Much discussion has occurred around whether teacher education's key goal is to prepare teachers as autonomous professionals able to adapt the curriculum to the diverse needs of students guided by a strong moral compass, whether teacher preparation should be focused on equipping teachers with technical expertise capable of effectively enacting the curriculum and managing classrooms (e. …

Measuring Credential Candidates’ Impact on Student Achievement

The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) requires faculty from educator preparation programs to provide evidence of credential candidates’ impact on K-12 student learning. However, there is a paucity of information on preparation programs’ use of direct assessments of student learning to gauge credential candidate effectiveness and engage in a continuous cycle of program improvement. Rather, measures of impact consist primarily of indirect estimates, such as results from licensure exams, supervisor evaluations, and classroom observations. This article describes the use of single-subject research design as a method of assessing the impact of credential candidates on K-12 student learning, especially as it relates to meeting the instructional and behavioral needs of diverse students. Implications for how this evaluation approach may be applied to a wide array of commonly targeted K-12 student skills, and employed within a broader program evaluation system are discussed.

Performance Assessment of Teaching

Recent challenges concerning the quality of teachers and the programs that prepare them have resulted in responses from professional organizations that have been more widespread and intense than in the past (Robinson, 2011; Wiseman, 2012). The Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation (BRP) formed by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the merger of NCATE and Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) into Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) to improve teacher education (Cibulka, 2011), and the Teacher Performance Assessment Initiative which emerged from collaboration between the Performance Assessment for California Teachers (PACT), the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), and American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) member institutions (Robinson, 2011) are examples of ways that professional organizations have responded to the challenges. In general, calls for performance assessments of teaching to provide both formative and summative information about the quality of teachers, teacher candidates, and teacher preparation programs pervade the current discourse on education at every level, including schools and districts, institutions of higher education, state and national policymaking entities, and professional organizations. As a result, a number of performance assessments have emerged that can provide feedback to teacher education programs about the strengths and weaknesses of their candidates as well as evidence for licensure and certification of teachers. For example, Education Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA) was designed to provide information for program improvement through the use of a common set of performance assessments for preservice teachers and has also been adopted by states and districts for summative evaluation purposes (http://edtpa.aacte.org/). The multiple performance measures in systems like edTPA improve upon value added models (VAM) by providing information on teaching quality, not just teacher quality or teacher effectiveness, and provide information sooner than might be accomplished by use of VAM alone (Newton, 2010). For this theme issue, we invited research and conceptual articles related to teacher performance assessments specifically as they affect teacher education, including validation studies of measures used in the assessments. We posed a series of questions that we considered important for researchers to address related to performance assessments, including the following: What are the relationships between current performance assessments and teacher education, either conceptually or in terms of outcomes? What do we know about the use of performance assessments in the context of teacher education, and what do we need to know? How do performance assessments of teachers in schools map onto assessment of teacher education programs, or how don't they? What differences may exist across novice teachers and expert teachers with respect to performance assessment, and how does that impact their professional learning? What are the implications of the relationships between for-profit companies, university teacher education programs, researchers, states, and professional organizations with respect to performance assessments of teachers? What is the relationship between assessment criteria and the research on teaching and learning, and what are its implications for teacher education? How do states make decisions to move to statewide teacher assessment systems? What potential conflicts of interest may exist among various stakeholders in performance assessment efforts? How do policies related to performance assessment of teachers affect opportunities for teacher learning? What can we learn from the history of past efforts to evaluate beginning teachers? What is different this time? What do we know about the validity and reliability of performance assessments and why does this matter? …

The CAEP Standards and Research on Educator Preparation Programs: Linking Clinical Partnerships With Program Impact

Responding to the challenge of more rigorous and outcome-oriented program evaluation criteria of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), authors take a critical look at the intersection of two standards: Clinical Partnerships and Practice (Standard 2) and Program Impact (Standard 4). Illustrating one aspect of a secondary education teacher preparation program, authors consider how clinical partnerships can be designed in light of these standards to have a positive impact on P-12 student learning. Focusing on the program evaluation framework, authors describe a spectrum of diverse formative and summative growth measures that document the scope of impact for all stakeholders, including students. In light of the Feuer, Floden, Chudowsky, and Ahn (2013) questioning framework, authors assess program outcomes. In closing, the authors (a) conclude that comprehensive evaluation models are needed to document complex outcomes, which will make program impact more visible and measureable; (b) recommend using the Feuer et al. decision-making framework to initiate and guide programmatic design and evaluation model development; and (c) affirm CAEP's expectations—clinical partnerships go beyond positive relationships, coselection of mentor teachers and candidates, and commitment to diverse settings to ensuring P-12 student achievement—as attainable goals for educator preparation accreditation.