» Jan. 20, 2017

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONUNIT

WELCOME

OPENING REMARKSwith Provost Michael Gealt

CAEP UPDATEwith Dr. Dale-Elizabeth Pehrsson and Dr. Jennifer Klemm

October 2015 Inquiry Brief Self-Study submitted to CAEPFebruary 2016 CAEP Site Visit Summer 2016 Site Visit Team audit report submitted to CMUSeptember 2016 Site visit team audit report finalizedOctober 2016 CAEP Accreditation Council Review Panel metNovember 2016 CAEP Accreditation Council decision announcedDecember 2016 CMU & MDE submitted “letters of reconsideration” to CAEP

Accreditation TIMELINE

AUDIT OPINIONOverall, the Inquiry Brief Self-Study earned a clean audit opinion. The site visit team also concluded that the evidence supports the view that Central Michigan University is committed to the Professional Education Unit.

AUDIT REPORTCAEP Site Visit Team

Standard 1: Key assessments and data collection (e.g., overreliance on indirect assessments)

Standard 4: Evidence and data collection for measuring impact of graduates on P-12 student learning

Standard 5: Improve overall plan to meet the requirements for annual reporting and the evidence requirements of the next accreditation cycle

Three areas forIMPROVEMENT

All standards met & three areas for

improvement

CAEP AccreditationCOUNCIL DECISION

2013 CAEP STANDARDS INITIAL TEACHER PREPARATION LEVEL

PROGRAMS

MET/NOT MET

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

(AFI)

STIPULATION

STANDARD 1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge

NOT MET NO YES

STANDARD 2: Clinical Partnerships and Practice

MET NO NO

STANDARD 3: Candidate Quality, Recruitment and Selectivity

MET NO NO

STANDARD 4: Program Impact MET YES NO

STANDARD 5: Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement

MET NO YES

CMU’s educator preparation program accreditation remains intact; our students continue to learn and graduate from an accredited program.

The Professional Education Unit (PEU) at Central Michigan University is accredited with probation by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) from Fall 2016 to Spring 2019.

Due to probationary status, an Interim Self-Study and Site Visit will be scheduled within 24 months to address Standard 1 (unmet standard), stipulations and AFI.

ACCREDITATION STATUS

Next StepsTIMELINE

APRIL 14, 2017 CAEP Annual Report Due

FALL 2017 Updated and/or new instruments will be in place to begin collecting evidence for CAEP

OCTOBER 31, 2018 Interim Self-Study due

SPRING 2019 Interim Site Visit

OCTOBER 2019 CAEP Accreditation Council Review Panel Meets

NOVEMBER 2019 CAEP Accreditation Council Decision Announced

OCTOBER 2022 Self-Study due for next accreditation cycle

SPRING 2023 Site Visit for next accreditation cycle

Standard 1: Content & Pedagogical Knowledge

The measures used between 2011 and 2014 display many of the same issues with alignment and relevance that led to a weakness in TEAC Quality Principle 1, Component 1.5 based on the Fall 2010 visit of the Undergraduate Teacher Education Program.

The revised measures improve upon this, but need additional refinements to overcome alignment and relevance issues.

StipulationRATIONALE

Common Rubric for a Lesson Plan PEAC will evaluate for alignment with InTASC standards as well as overall technical adequacy

Final Student Teaching Evaluation PEAC will evaluate instrument for technical adequacy

Final Pre-Student Teaching Evaluation PEAC will evaluate instrument for technical adequacy

Michigan Test for Teacher Certification (MTTC)Required measure

Need Direct Evidence PEAC will identify an additional direct evidence of teacher candidate content and pedagogical knowledge

ACTION PLANS

Standard 4: Program ImpactThe evidence presented for Standard 4 components is weak and the plan for future data collection is underspecified.

AFI & RATIONALE

P-12 Program Impact Case Study Continued implementation of the case study to evaluate completer effectiveness

Principal Survey Implementation of a state wide survey

MDE Year Out Survey

CARRS Three Year Out Alumni Survey PEAC will work with CARRS to evaluate for alignment

CMU First Destination Survey Observation & P-12 student survey evidence needed for completers

ACTION PLANS

StipulationRATIONALE

Standard 5: Content & Pedagogical KnowledgeThe plans for Standard 5 were incomplete with respect to the published CAEP Guidelines for Plans (which were published after the Brief was submitted), but were more complete with respect to the guidance received by early adopters which asked for tagging to CAEP components and a discussion of relevance, timeline for activities, and evidence that the EPP has sufficient human and non-human resources to carry out the plan.

The plans will need to be further fleshed out to meet the requirements for annual reporting and the evidence requirements of the next accreditation cycle

Taskstream™ PEAC will monitor the implementation of the data management system for use within all PEU programs

Reliability & Validity PEAC will evaluate all instruments for technical adequacy as well as establish procedures for inter-rater reliability

8 Annual Measures CAEP required evidence for 8 measures. We must also document how programs are using these 8 evidences to make programmatic decisions

Data Packs Continued use of data packs to share program data

ACTION PLANS

ANNUAL MEASURESto include in the CAEP Annual Report

45

123

Impact on P-12 Learning & Development

Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

Employer Satisfaction

Completer Satisfaction

Graduation/Completer Rates

7

8

6 Certification/Licensing

Ability of completers to be hired for positions in which they were prepared

Consumer Information (i.e., student loan default rates)

*

*

* Not required in 2017 annual report

SECONDARY FACULTYLEARNING COMMUNITY

with Denny St.John

Secondary Faculty LEARNING COMMUNITY

Co-FacilitatorsShane Cavanaugh, Teacher Education and Professional Development FacultyLarry Corbett, Assistant Dean and Director of Professional Education UnitSheila Roupe, Coordinator, Center for Clinical Experiences

Committee MembersAshley Allen, Faculty, MusicCarlin Borsheim-Black, Faculty, English Language and LiteratureShannon Ebner, Assistant Director, Center for Student ServicesMike Federspiel, Fixed-term Faculty, HistoryTamara Jetton, Faculty, Teacher Education and Professional DevelopmentSusan Knight, Faculty, Foreign Languages, Literature and CulturesDeb Linton, Faculty, BiologyDenny St. John, Faculty, MathematicsJennifer Weible, Faculty, Teacher Education and Professional Development

RECOMMENDATIONSRECOMMENDATIONS

2a. Add a 40-hour field experience component to EDU 325 and re-evaluate course

2b. Increase Secondary field experience hours in content methods courses from 30 to 40 hours.

1

2

Create a tiered and progressive academic program tied to the professional education sequence.

Develop a progressive clinical field experience sequence of a minimum of 90 hours prior to the student teaching experience.

5 Restructure of EDU 450.

Encourage programs to consider a non-degree path for teacher education students pursuing a Secondary Education BS degree.

Restructure of EDU 495.6

7

Additional Considerations: The Secondary FLC fully supports the Restructure of EDU 290.

8

9

One WI course should be added to the Teacher Education sequence and programs should be encouraged to add an additional WI course in the content area.

Establish a standing steering committee for the secondary education programs, containing representatives that comprise the PEU.

PEU/MDE UPDATESwith Betty Kirby

60708090

100

1020304050

Spring 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Fall 2015 Spring 2016 Fall 2016

7379

7279

6371

29

4973

Spring 2017

53 50 74 ?

?

Teacher Education ADMISSION

» Professional Readiness Exam

» Certificate Structure

» MTTC Reporting

» Microcredentialing

» DARTEP - Feb. 3, 2017, 9 to 11 a.m. French Auditorium

Updates & ANNOUNCEMENTS

Questions?