CTC Common Standards Addendum

Common Standards Addendum, February 20, 2018

Cal State East Bay

Addendum to the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) Common Standards

February 20, 2018

Standard 1: Institutional Infrastructure to Support Educator Preparation

Standard 1: Response to the Preliminary Report of Findings

1.1 Speech/Language Pathology Stakeholder Involvement

Provide additional evidence that “the institution actively involves faculty, instructional personnel, and relevant stakeholders in the organization, coordination, and decision making for all educator programs.”

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Provide additional evidence of SLP Advisory Council membership and participation, interviews and review of evidence at site visit.

Element 2 of Common Standard 1 states: “The institution actively involves faculty, instructional personnel, and relevant stakeholders in the organization, coordination, and decision making for all educator preparation programs.”

This section explains how the Speech/Language Pathology (SLP) Credential Program involves stakeholders in the organization, coordination, and decision making of that program. The leadership and faculty of the SLP program interact with stakeholders in a variety of ways on an ongoing basis. “Stakeholders” refers primarily to personnel in local school districts, but also includes personnel working for other agencies and members of the community.

Advisory Council

The SLP Program has significant interaction with stakeholders on an ongoing basis. Because of the depth and utility of this interaction, the program has not convened an Advisory Council for a few years. However, a variety of factors led an Advisory Council meeting in December of 2017 (conversion to semesters, new faculty hiring, accreditation). The SLP Advisory Council met on December 7, 2017. Here is a link to the Meeting Notes, which includes a roster of attendees.

Annual Capstone Course Panels

Twice each year, a panel from key stakeholders attends a class session of SPPA 6300, the capstone course in the credential program. The panel is selected from local school districts and other agencies that employ SLP graduates. The faculty member teaching SPPA 6300, who is also the field program coordinator, attends the panel presentations. Panel members respond to questions from SLP candidates and provide insights that shape the organization and coordination of the SLP program. Discussions have covered a variety of topics including case/time management, electronic documentation, collaborative treatment, the use of translators, and inter-disciplinary care.

Thus, the SPPA 6030 panels function much like an advisory council. Here is a link to the rosters of Panel Participants since 2013.

Surveys of Parents/Caretakers of Children Enrolled in the Campus Clinic

SLP candidates spend 15- 18 hours providing services to community members in our on-campus Rees Speech, Language and Hearing Clinic. Clients range from preschoolers to senior citizens. Annually, the parents/caretakers of children receiving services complete a survey evaluating the clinic experience. Data from these surveys helps SLP faculty improve the quality of the clinic experience. Here are links to the Blank Survey Form and a Summary of Results Winter 2015 and Summary of Results Winter 2016.

Ongoing Dialogue with School District Personnel Concerning School-Based Field Experiences

Annually, the coordinator SLP field experiences talks to over 70 different employees from 21 local school districts to manage school-based experiences for SLP candidates. The discussions are ongoing - and go beyond the logistics of placements in the schools. The conversations cover all aspects of speech/language pathology in public schools and become a source of stakeholder input on the design of the SLP program.

Implementation Process for CALIPSO

During the 2016-2017 academic year, SLP faculty adopted the Clinical Assessment of Learning Inventory of Performance Streamlined Office Operations (CALIPSO) to evaluate SLP candidates in their field placements. CALIPSO is a web-based application that manages key aspects of academic and clinical education – and is designed specifically and exclusively for speech-language pathology programs.

The process of implementing CALIPSO required extensive interaction by SLP faculty with the program’s school district partners. While the focus was on the use of CALIPSO, the discussions provided district personnel an opportunity to comment on all aspects of the SLP candidates’ school-based experiences. This is a link to the CALIPSO evaluation.

Other Interactions with Stakeholders

Several other opportunities for significant interaction with stakeholders has occurred during the last three years, including:

Service Learning. The service learning requirement in SPPA 6070 has resulted in an ongoing dialogue with personnel from local school districts. The input from district personnel helps define the design of the service learning experience. Here is a link to the course syllabus describing the service learning expectation.

Off-Site Clinical Placements. SLP candidates are required to complete a 9 week off-site clinical placement. Discussions about the off-site clinical experience provide an opportunity for stakeholders to play in role in defining the off-site clinical experience.

Two Examples of Program Change Resulting from Stakeholder Input

An example of program change resulting from stakeholder input is the requirement that candidates take either SPPA 6228 or SPPA 6999. A consistent message from stakeholders, especially the Capstone Panels and school district personnel, was that the program needed to bolster some of the skills required of completers working in public schools. The program now offers two “elective” courses addressing those issues: SPPA 6228, School, Based Issues, and SPPA 6999: Advanced Articulation and Phonological Disorders. Candidates must take one of these courses.

Another example of program change resulting from stakeholder input was the decision to add a bilingual assignment, focusing on the use of interpreters, in SPPA 6300.

1.2 Speech-Language Pathology Authority and Accountability

Provide additional evidence that “The Unit Leadership has the authority and institutional support required to address the needs of all educator preparation programs and considers the interests of each program within the institution.”

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Provide additional evidence that demonstrate clear lines of authority and accountability of shared unit head responsibilities (CEAS Dean and CLASS Dean) for SLP program. Enhanced Organizational Chart delineating specific authority and interviews at site visit.

This section describes the authority and accountability structure for the Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) Credential Program. First, it is important to note our Professional Education Unit does not have a “shared unit head.” The Dean of the College of Education and Allied Studies (CEAS) is the sole head of the Unit. We realize that the organization chart provided in our Response to the Preconditions may have led to the perception that there are two Unit heads.

For purposes of CTC accreditation, the line of authority and accountability for the SLP Program runs to the Head of the Professional Education Unit, the CEAS Dean. For the traditional academic functions of an institution of higher education, the line of authority and accountability for the SLP Program runs to the Dean of the College of Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences (CLASS). The SLP program is housed in the Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders (CSD), which is in CLASS. This link will take you to a focused organization chart: Enhanced Organization Chart: Speech-Language Pathology Credential Program.

This arrangement has worked well. The needs of the SLP program have been addressed on a consistent basis and the program has sufficient resources to be successful. For example, CEAS has provided additional compensation to all program coordinators and faculty who write required CTC documents, such as the Biennial Reports and Program Assessment documents. This includes CEAS-funded additional compensation to the authors of the SLP documents. The CLASS Dean, on the other hand, provides release time and additional compensation to the CSD Chair to fulfill her duties.

The CEAS Dean and the CLASS Dean have a positive working relationship and conduct an ongoing dialogue about the SLP Program. Most of these discussions take place during, before, or after the regular meetings of the four Cal State East Bay Deans. Recent topics of these discussions have included the leadership of the program, the budget challenges of the program, and the CTC accreditation process. It is difficult to recall when there has been an issue in which the Deans disagreed – but both Deans are committed to resolving any issues with solutions that are mutually acceptable to each Dean.

More specifically, traditional academic areas addressed by the CLASS Dean include faculty and staff hiring and evaluation, operating budget, curriculum development and approval, course scheduling, and student registration. CLASS has two Associate Deans who have responsibilities delegated to them by the CLASS Dean. The CSD Chair and CSD staff work directly with CLASS Associate Deans on most academic items.

In regards to CTC accreditation, the CEAS Dean delegates oversight and operational leadership of the Unit credential programs to the Accreditation Coordinator. The CEAS Associate Dean also addresses some accreditation issues (e.g., she has many responsibilities for the site visit). The SLP program has received considerable assistance from the Unit Accreditation Coordinator, including preparation of CTC-required documents, the development and implementation of the SLP Program Improvement Plan, and assistance in SLP’s role in the Unit Improvement Plan. Through these activities, the Unit Accreditation Coordinator helps the SLP program maintain compliance with the CTC Preconditions, Common Standards, and Program Standards.

Communication among the Unit Accreditation Coordinator, the CEAS Associate Dean, and CSD Chair and staff occurs in both formal informal settings. Either the CSD Chair or CSD staff, often both, attend all meetings of the Unit’s Accreditation CEAS Team (ACT). The minutes of recent ACT meetings are available through this ACT MEETINGS – CSD faculty and staff are boldfaced on the roster of participants for each meeting.

The CEAS Associate Dean and one of the CLASS Associate Deans discuss issues related to the SLP Program throughout the academic year. Topics that have been discussed recently include resources and personnel in the SLP Program.

Ad hoc communication occurs when issues need to be resolved. For example, recently the CEAS Associate Dean engaged in a dialogue with CSD faculty and staff to improve the process of gaining approval of MOUs with school districts and other agencies. Another example: The Unit’s Accreditation Coordinator devoted many hours to working with the CSD Chair on the Program Assessment document submission and responses.

B. Standard 1: Additional Evidence

1.B.1 Faculty Diversity Data, Fall Quarter 2017

1.B.2 Accreditation CEAS Team (ACT): Roster, 2017-2018

1.B.3 Accreditation CEAS Team (ACT): Meeting Notes, 10/11/17, 11/08/17, and 1/10/18

1.B.4 Campus Committee on Professional PK-12 Education (CCPK-12E): Roster and Meeting Notes of the April 6, 2017 Meeting

1.B.5 Communicative Sciences and Disorders Advisory Council (Speech/Language Pathology): Roster and Meeting Notes of the December 7, 2017 Meeting

1.B.6 Educational Leadership Advisory Council (Administrative Services Preliminary and Administrative Services Clear): Roster and Meeting Notes of (2016-2017 Meeting)

1.B.7 Educational Leadership Institute (Administrative Services Preliminary and Administrative Services Clear): 2017 Program

1.B.8 Educational Leadership Institute (Administrative Services Preliminary and Administrative Services Clear): 2016 Program

1.B.9 Pupil Personnel Services Advisory Council/Supervisors (School Counseling and School Psychology): Roster and Meeting Notes of the October 5, 2016 Meeting

1.B.10 Pupil Personnel Services Advisory Council/Supervisors (School Counseling and School Psychology): Roster and Meeting Notes of the October 11, 2017 Meeting

1.B.11 Special Education Advisory Council (Added Authorizations, Mild to Moderate and Moderate to Severe Disabilities): Roster and Meeting Notes of the May 11, 2017 Meeting

1.B.12 Superintendents’ Forum: Roster and Meeting Notes of the October 4, 2017 Meeting

1.B.13 Teacher Education Advisory Council (Reading, Multiple Subject, & Single Subject Programs): Roster and Meeting Notes of the April 26, 2017 Meeting

1.B.14 Department of Educational Leadership (Administrative Services Prelim and Clear Credentials) Winter 2018 Quarterly Update

Standard 2: Candidate Recruitment and Support

A. Standard 2: Response to the Preliminary Report of Findings

2.1 Evidence from the Diversity Recruitment Plan

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Provide Evidence from the Diversity Recruitment Plan

This will be provided during the visit.

Unit Level

Program Level

All programs completed their Program Diversity Recruitment Plans – please click on CANDIDATE DIVERSITY to view them.

2.A.1 Administrative Services Credential Tier I: Diverse Completer Video Example #1

2.A.2 Administrative Services Credential Tier I: Diverse Completer Video Example #2

2.A.3 Basic Teaching Credential Programs Externally Funded Grants: Candidate Diversity

B. Standard 2: Additional Evidence </str

2.B.1 Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders (Speech Language Pathology Credential) Career Fair Flyer, May 25, 2017

2.B.2 Gender and Ethnicity of Program Candidates, Fall and Summer 2017 Entry

Standard 3: Course of Study, Fieldwork, and Clinicae

A. Standard 3: Response to the Preliminary Report of Findings</stro

3.1 Fieldwork

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Provide evidence related to the following:

  • * Field placement assignments
  • * Specific qualifications of school based supervisors (sbs)
  • * Selection criteria of sbs
  • * Supervisor training documents

Provide evidence of how fieldwork and clinical practice evaluated.

Administrative Services Preliminary (Tier I)</str

Notes:

In the Preliminary Credential Program, candidates complete almost all of their required fieldwork at the school site where they teach. An administrator at that school site or in the school district serves as the candidate’s School-Based Supervisor, and is referred to as the “District Mentor.” University Supervisors are called ‘University Coaches.”

  1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. Preliminary Administrative Services Credential Program Review Document (01/31/17)
    2. Addendum to Preliminary Administrative Services Credential Program Review Document
    3. Course syllabi for fieldwork courses (non intern), EDLD 6801, EDLD 6802, and EDLD 6803
    4. Course syllabi for fieldwork courses (interns), EDLD 6804, EDLD 6805, and EDLD 6806
    5. Coaching for Equity Handbook
  2. Other focused sources of evidence:
    1. CAPES Formative Assignment, Directions and
    2. CAPES Portfolio, Summative, Directions and Rubric
    3. Fieldwork Activities, Directions and Rubric
    4. Fieldwork Evaluations
    5. Equity Plan Directions and Rubric
    6. Candidate Placements, 2016-2017
    7. School District Partners Contact List, 2016-2017
    8. Three Day Coaching Class for University Coaches
    9. Workshop Materials for University Coaches

Administrative Services Professional (Tier II) </str

Notes:

School-based Supervisors are called “Coaches.”

  1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. Administrative Services Clear Induction Program Review Document
  2. Other focused sources of evidence:
    1. Individual Induction Plan
    2. Coaching Protocol Document
    3. Individual Induction Assessment Rubric
    4. Three Day Coaching Class for University Coaches
    5. Workshop Materials for University Coaches

Education Specialist: Mild to Moderate Disabilities Preliminary

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. Education Specialist, Mild to Moderate and Moderate to Severe Disabilities Program Assessment Document (8/4/16 Final Draft), Standard 15, pages 148-168
    2. Education Specialist Teaching Credential Program Handbook, pages 18-28
    3. Intern Manual
  2. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. Handbook for Supervisors, Cooperating Teacher and Employer Provided Mentors
    2. Intern App Hours Reports – Special Education
    3. Mild to Moderate Fieldwork Tracking Sheet
    4. Mild to Moderate Fieldwork/Student Teaching Evaluation Form

Education Specialist: Moderate to Severe Disabilities Preliminary

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 Education Specialist, Mild to Moderate and Moderate to Severe Disabilities Program Assessment Document (8/4/16 Final Draft), Standard 15, pages 148-168
    2. 1.2 Education Specialist Teaching Credential Program Handbook, pages 18-28
    3. 1.3 Intern Manual
  2. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. 2.1 Handbook for Supervisors, Cooperating Teacher and Employer Provided Mentors
    2. 2.2 Intern App Hours Reports – Special Education
    3. 2.3 Moderate to Severe Fieldwork Evaluation Form

Multiple Subject Teaching

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 Multiple Subject Program Assessment Document (11/3/16 Final Draft), Standards 14 and 15, pages 110-117
    2. 1.2 Multiple Subject Teaching Credential Program Handbook, 2017-2018, pages 16-26
    3. 1.3 Intern Forms and Policies Manual, 2017-2018
    4. 1.4 Department of Teacher Education Supervisor Handbook, 2017-2018
  2. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. Video Overview for School-Based Supervisors
    2. Student Teacher/Cooperating Teacher/University Supervisor Checklist
    3. Intern/Mentor Teacher/ University Supervisor Checklist
    4. Multiple Subject and Single Subject University Supervisor Meeting PowerPoint, May 3, 2017
    5. Multiple Subject and Single Subject University Supervisor Meeting PowerPoint, September 13 & 19, 20172.7 Multiple Subjects and Single University Supervisors 2017 General Information PowerPoint
    6. Intern App Hours Reports – Multiple Subject (see Intern App links)
    7. Multiple Subjects Summative Field Experience Evaluation

Pupil Personnel Services: School Counseling

Notes: No formal training program is necessary for University Supervisors in the PPS programs. All University supervision is completed by five full-time, tenure-track faculty and two long-serving lecturers. The Program Coordinator contacts all supervisors at least once every other week.

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 PPS School Counseling Program Assessment Document (12/16/15 Final Draft), Standards 31 and 32, pages 82-85
    2. 1.2 School Counseling Student Program Handbook, pages 17 -19
    3. 1.3 PPS Supervisor Handbook
  2. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. 2.1 School-Based Supervisor/Advisory Council Meeting, October 11, 2017
    2. 2.2 Supervision Guidelines – First-Year Students
    3. 2.3 Supervision Guidelines – Second Year Students
    4. 2.4 Supervisor Certificate
    5. 2.5 Crisis Situations
    6. 2.6 First-Year Fieldwork Evaluation
    7. 2.7 Second-Year, Advanced Fieldwork Evaluation
    8. 2.8 School Counseling Fieldwork Log

Pupil Personnel Services: School Psychology

Notes: No formal training program is necessary for University Supervisors in the PPS programs. All University supervision is completed by five full-time, tenure-track faculty and two long-serving lecturers. The Program Coordinator contacts all supervisors at least once every other week.

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 PPS School Psychology Program Assessment Document (12/23/14 Final Draft), Standards 25, 26, & 27, pages 65-84
    2. 1.2 Clinical Child/School Psychology Program Student Handbook
    3. 1.3 PPS Supervisor Handbook
  2. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. 2.1 School-Based Supervisor/Advisory Council Meeting, October 11, 2017
    2. 2.2 Various Other Fieldwork Documents in the Student Handbook (Fieldwork Guidelines, Fieldwork Goals and Objectives, Practicum Information Sheet, Fieldwork Logs, Checklists, Agreements)
    3. 2.3 Clinical Child/School Psychology Program First-Year Fieldwork Evaluation
    4. 2.4 Clinical Child/School Psychology Program Second Year, Advanced Fieldwork Evaluation
    5. 2.5 Clinical Child Psychology Program Third Year, Intern Fieldwork Evaluation

Reading and Literacy Added Authorization

Notes:

(a) There is required work with K-12 students in every program class (TED 6220, TED 6230, TED 6231, TED 6232, and TED 6253). Thus fieldwork “supervision” is completed by the course instructors.

(b) The clinical experience, either in the Spring or Summer, is part of TED 6253.

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 Reading and Literacy Added Authorization (Reading Certificate) Program Assessment Document (12/18/15 Final Draft)
    2. 1.2 Course syllabi for:

1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:Single Subject Teaching

  1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. 1.1 Single Subject Program Assessment Document (11/3/16 Final Draft), Standards 14 and 15, pages 93 - 107
    2. 1.2 Single Subject Teaching Credential Program Handbook, 2017-2018, pages 14-24
    3. 1.3 Intern Forms and Policies Manual, 2017-2018
    4. 1.4 Department of Teacher Education Supervisor Handbook, 2017-2018
  2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. 2.1 Video Overview for School Based Supervisors
    2. 2.2 Student Teacher/Cooperating Teacher/University Supervisor Checklist
    3. 2.3 Intern/Mentor Teacher/ University Supervisor Checklist
    4. 2.4 Multiple Subject and Single Subject University Supervisor Meeting PowerPoint, May 3, 2017
    5. 2.5 Multiple Subject and Single Subject University Supervisor Meeting PowerPoint, September 13 & 19, 2017
    6. 2.6 Multiple Subjects and Single University Supervisors 2017 General Information PowerPoint
    7. 2.7 Intern App Hours Reports – Single Subject (see links on Intern App Reports)
    8. 2.8 Single Subject Summative Field Experience Evaluation

Special Education Added Authorizations - Autism Spectrum

Notes:

The Autism Spectrum Authorization is embedded in the Preliminary Special Education Credential Programs and consists of four courses: EPSY 6124, EPSY 6137, EPSY 6141, and EPSY 6143. Fieldwork assignments are included in each course and are evaluated by the course instructor.

  1. 1. Sources of evidence on all items listed by the Common Standards Response reviewer: (a) Field Placement Assignments, (b) Specific Qualifications of School Based Supervisors (SBS), (c) Selection criteria of School Based Supervisors, (d) Supervisor Training Documents, and (e) How Fieldwork and Clinical Practice Are Evaluated:
    1. Preliminary Education Specialist Credential Program Mild-Moderate and Moderate-Severe Disabilities Program Assessment Document (08/04/16 Final Draft), Autism Authorization Section, Pages 262 – 270
    2. Course Syllabi

Provide additional evidence, including current examples of how the unit collects feedback from key stakeholders such as employers and community partners.Speech/Language Pathology Services

  1. 1.1 Speech Language Hearing Services Credential – Speech Language Pathology Program Assessment Document (12/18/15 Final Draft), Standards 6, 7, and 8, pages 20 – 22
  2. 1.2 Student Handbook and Clinical Training Manual
  3. 2. Other, focused sources of evidence:
    1. 2.1 Clinical Assessment of Learning Inventory of Performance Streamlined Office Operations (CALIPSO)
    2. 2.2 SPPA 6070 Service Learning Project Summary and Reflection

B. Standard 3: Additional Evidence

No additional evidence beyond that listed above.

Standard 4: Continuous Improvement

A. Standard 4: Response to the Preliminary Report of Findings

Part(s) of the standards for which more information is needed

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Element 1: There is a need to confirm that the system is operating as depicted through interviews with coordinators, department chairs, and program faculty, and other available evidence.

Element 2: Participation of candidates and stakeholders in the assessment system can be confirmed at the site visit.

No additional narrative or links will be provided – all additional evidence requested by the Reviewer will be gained through interviews during the site visit.

B. Standard 4: Additional Evidence

4. B.1 Unit Improvement Objective 16-1 Updated Data

Standard 5: Program Impact

A. Standard 5: Response to the Preliminary Report of Findings

5.1 Program Impact Progress

Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit

Please have available evidence related to the progress of the program impact data collection/analysis plan

Cohort 2015-92 Project

The Description of Positive Program Impact we provided in our Common Standards Response failed to mention an ambitious, three-year project to gain data from completers of one of our Multiple Subject Credential Program cohorts. This was a pilot project was implemented to see if we could gain more complete data on program completers than that gained through surveys. This is a link to the report of the findings: Program Impact: Cohort 2015-92 Project.

Administrative Services Preliminary (Tier I) Equity Plans

Each candidate for this credential develops and implements an Equity Plan. The completion of these Equity Plans can have a significant, positive impact on K-12 schools and school districts.

This link shows abstracts of these Equity Plans that were presented at the 2017 Leadership Institute.

Additional Survey Data

The following links have the most recent results of our survey data:

Additional Anecdotal Evidence of Program Impact

Beyond what was available at the time the Response to the Common Standards was submitted, we have archived additional evidence of the success of our program completers. Click PROGRAM IMPACT.

B. Standard 5: Additional Evidence

No additional evidence beyond that listed above.

Comstanadd20180220