This document summarizes the transition from NCATE to CAEP accreditation standards for teacher preparation programs. It outlines the 5 CAEP standards focusing on content and pedagogy, clinical partnerships, candidate quality, program impact, and continuous improvement. Key aspects include an emphasis on student learning impact, effective clinical partnerships, candidate selectivity and quality, and using data for continuous program improvement. Next steps proposed are forming teams to implement the standards with a focus on content, clinical experiences, candidate standards, and quality assurance.
2. NCATE to CAEP
Two Teacher Preparation Accrediting Bodies to
One
NCATE
TEAC
Get to essence of teaching
Produce highly effective teachers
Best Practice
Meet legislated requirements
4. Standard One
Content and Pedagogical
Knowledge
The provider insures that
candidates develop a deep
understanding of the critical
concepts and principles of
their discipline and, by
completion, are able to use
discipline-specific practices
flexibly to advance the
learning of all students toward
attainment of college- and
career-readiness standards.
Key Terms
INTASC Standards
Deeper learning
Content connections
Apply and transfer
Learn to learn
What students know
Representations of ideas
Modifying textbooks
Analyzing learning
Parents and communities
5. Standard Two
Clinical Partnerships and
Practice
The provider ensures that
effective partnerships and
high-quality practice are
central to preparation so that
candidates develop the
knowledge, skills and
professional dispositions
necessary to demonstrate
positive impact on all P-12
students’ learning and
development.
Key Terms
Laboratory of learning
Partnerships
Impact on student
learning
Virtual fields
Clinical-based
preparation
Clinical educators
6. Standard Three
Candidate Quality, Recruitment,
and Selectivity
The provider demonstrates that the
quality of candidates is a continuing
and purposeful part of its
responsibility from recruitment, at
admission, through the progression
of courses and clinical experiences,
and to decisions that completers
are prepared to teach effectively
and are recommended for
certification. The provider
demonstrates that development of
candidate quality is the goal of
educator preparation in all phases
of the program. The process is
ultimately determined by a
program’s meeting of Standard 4.
Key Terms
Candidate quality
Recruitment
Selectivity
Diversity
Minimum Criteria
3.0 GPA
ACT, SAT, or GRE top 50%
Scores increase annually to
top 33%
Alternative criteria
Candidate dispositions
Monitor candidate progression
Any completing candidate
meets high quality standards
7. Standard Four
Program Impact
The provider demonstrates the
impact of its completers on P-
12 student learning and
development, classroom
instruction, and schools, and
the satisfaction of its
completers with the
relevance and effectiveness
of their preparation.
Key Terms
Impact on student
learning
Teaching effectiveness
Observation
Student surveys
Employer satisfaction
Completer satisfaction
8. Standard Five
Provider Quality Assurance and
Continuous Improvement
The provider maintains a quality
assurance system comprised of
valid data from multiple measures,
including evidence of candidates’
and completers’ positive impact on
P-12 student learning and
development. The provider supports
continuous improvement that is
sustained and evidence-based, and
that evaluates the effectiveness of
its completers. The provider uses the
results of inquiry and data collection
to establish priorities, enhance
program elements and capacity,
and test innovations to improve
completers’ impact on P-12 student
learning and development.
Key Terms
Quality assurance (aka,
assessment)
Reliable and valid data
Transparency
CAEP Pathways
Inquiry Brief
Continuous Improvement
Transformational Pathway
Impact of student learning
9. New Vocabulary
NCATE CAEP
Unit (EPP) Educator preparation provider Provider
Assessment Quality Assurance
Mentors Clinical Educators
Field Placements Partnerships
Field Experiences Clinical Experiences
Cohort
Group Average
Continued Terminology:
Candidate “our” students in the Teacher Prep Programs
Student P-12 students taught by our candidates
10. Next Steps?
Create Teams to discuss implementation
Standard One Team (Content)
Standard Two Team (Clinical Partnerships)
Standard Three Team (Candidate Quality)
Quality Assurance Team (Assessment)
Review Standards (see CAEP Folder in Angel COE
Community Group>Content)
Participate in CAEP State Alliance for Clinical
Educator Preparation and Partnerships organization
Pilot Tripod Student Survey process
11. Questions and Discussion
What questions do your have as we begin this
transition process?
When you hear the phrase “Impact on student
learning and development” what issues and insights
come to mind?
What do Clinical Partnerships look like as you
envision them?
What ideas do you have to improve our selectivity,
recruiting and diversity of our candidates?
How do you think we can improve our quality
assurance (assessment) process for the college
program?
Editor's Notes
Viewed merge as opportunity to refine and refocus teacher preparation.Redesign was was grounded in empirical research, or where not available, best practice.This is not a repackaging of the old standardsOld Standards 5 & 6 are goneRedirection to the work of what teachers do.
It might be helpful to look at the overarching goals or focus areas that are driving the new standards.Impact on Student Learning: It makes sense in this professional atmosphere of evaluating teachers partially on the gains their students make, that CAEP wants us to think ultimately how our efforts will help candidates make an impact on their students’ achievement.CAEP sees this task as a collective effort between us, the candidate and the clinical educators (mentors and supervisors) who support them.Laboratories of Learning: The old paradigm of asking classroom teachers to move aside and allow our candidates to “practice” on their students has been dying quickly as a result of new teacher evaluation programs. Instead of that model, CAEP wants clinical experiences to be restructured as a partnership in support of candidate growth. This growth should be evident in candidate knowledge of their content and teaching. Quality Candidates: CAEP stresses that the profession should strive to improve the quality of candidates coming into the profession. We need to become more involved in this process on several levels.
High need areasSTEMLanguage LearnersSpecial NeedsMeeting employment trends and needs
Standard One TeamWhat program and course changes may need to be made?What changes to our syllabi need to be madeEg, reflect focus on InTASCStandard Two TeamComplete restructure of Clinical PracticeStandard Three TeamWork with AdmissionsMarketingQuality Assurance TeamRedesignMeasure of effectivenessTransparency and WebsiteBe sure to mention:State AllianceTripod Student Survey