Proposed New Standards for the

Accreditation of AuD Programs

Accreditation Commission for Audiology Education

Accreditation Commission for Audiology Education (ACAE)

Lisa Hunter, Chair of Board of DirectorsDoris Gordon, Executive Director

Disclosures• Doris Gordon has a financial interest as an

employee in her position as Executive Director of the Accreditation Commission for Audiology Education (ACAE).

• Lisa Hunter is Associate Professor at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and the University of Cincinnati and has a nonfinancial interest as the Chair of the ACAE.

Learning OutcomesAfter attending this session, participants will be able to:• Develop a deeper appreciation for ACAE’s

accreditation process• Describe ACAE’s deliberative and collaborative

process in revising Standards• State at least 2 contributions that external

agencies play in an accreditation agency’s Standards revision

What, Why, How, When?•What is the ACAE and what is our

purpose?•Why do standards matter and why should

they be updated?• How do standards get developed and

updated?•What are the proposed changes?• How can YOU provide input?•When will the new standards take effect?

ACAE Board of Directors

2014 BOARD OF DIRECTORS• Lisa Hunter, Ph.D., Chair • Catherine Palmer, Ph.D., Vice-Chair• Brian Taylor, Au.D., Treasurer• Angela Loavenbruck, Ed.D., Secretary• Jeff Browne, Public Member• Scott Griffiths, Ph.D.• Martha Mundy, Au.D.• Paul Pessis, Au.D.• Virginia Ramachandran, Au.D.• Maureen Valente, Ph.D.• Doris Gordon, MS/MPH, Executive Director (Ex-Officio)

Education is the base

of our professionLicense to practiceClinical Training

Academic Education

Learning is like rowing upstream:

not to advance is to drop back

• Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) – Recognized for Ten Years in 2012• Stakeholder Survey – 2012/2013 – Over 1000 responses

from audiology stakeholders • Draft of Revised Educational Standards – 2014 (In

progress 2012-2014)• Academic Programs: 5 accredited, 2 in progress and 1

scheduled to begin in summer 2014• Ohio State University accredited March 2014• New Website in 2013 www.acaeaccred.org

What is the ACAE & what have we accomplished?

Thank you to Plural Publishing for generous support of ACAE website development

• To establish rigorous standards for full scope of practice for doctoral level audiologists• To empower audiologists to practice their

chosen profession autonomously and responsibly• To prove outcomes that ensure we are providing

the highest level of audiologic care to the public• To demonstrate readiness for limited license

practitioner status

What is the purpose of ACAE?

Why do standards matter and why should they be updated?• Ensure all programs meet a consistent level• Promote a culture of professionalism• Best practice models • Transparency about education and training• Continual strive for excellence• Demonstrate to public, legislature and regulatory

bodies that we are prepared to diagnose and treat hearing and balance disorders• Provide a firm foundation for our future

How do standards get developed and updated?

Implement & Maintain Standard

Peer Review

Draft Standards

Garner member support

Create Development Plan

Implement and Maintain Standard

Gain Final Member Approval

What are the proposed changes?

Stakeholder Survey Task ForceLisa Hunter, ChairDoris GordonCatherine PalmerMaureen ValenteVirginia Ramachandran

Standards Review CommitteeIan Windmill, ChairElaine MormerJackson RoushBarry FreemanCynthia Compton-Conley

1000+ responses, ideas and review

Committee and board

review

2013 Stakeholder Survey

Process:• Developed by task force

of ACAE• Survey peer-reviewed by

AAA, ADA, CAPCSD, SAA• Sent to all members of

AAA, ADA, CAPCSD• Open 6 weeks for

responses in December 201 - 2013

Goals:• Understand views of

educators, clinicians and students• Importance of current

standards• Achievement of current

standards• Areas of focus for

standards update

• No changes – 5 standards• Minor Changes – 15 standards

•Word changes• Clarification or removing redundancy• Title changes• Substantive changes – 13 standards• Requires actions or reports

tiny tweaks >> Minor Changes >>MAJOR CHANGES >> NEW STANDARDS

Major Changes: 12 of 34 Standards• Standard # 5 • Standard # 6• Standard # 12• Standard # 15• Standard # 19• Standard # 21

• Standard # 25• Standard # 30• Standard # 31• Standard # 32• Standard # 33• Standard # 34

Standard 5: StructureThe program must have a current statement of its mission and the measureable goals and objectives by which it intends to prepare students for the independent and comprehensive practice of audiology.

• Goals should be measurable rather than generic• Programs should

demonstrate how they measure their goals and objectives

Standard 6: Goals and Objectives Assessment• The program must have an ongoing method in place to evaluate and improve the extent to which it meets its goals and objectives to prepare students for the independent and comprehensive practice of audiology.

• Ongoing methods must be in place• Continuous

improvement is a hallmark of quality programs

Standard 12: Student Support Services• Academic advising has been removed from

Standard 12 (Student Support Services).• Standards 14 (Recruitment Practices) and

Standard 15 (Admission Practices) have been combined (Recruitment and Admission Practices.)• Student Advising is a separate standard

(Standard 15.)

Standard 15: Student Advising (New)The program must have a student advising process whereby students’ performance in the classroom and clinic is monitored in an ongoing manner, with associated communication and documentation.

Standard 19: Program Quality

• Emphasizes “…the process, tools and benchmarks…”• Requires programs to

demonstrate the measurement of quality

ProposedThe program must be committed to attaining the highest quality in its education of students and must demonstrate the process, tools and benchmarks used to measure quality.

Standard 21: Required Knowledge and Competencies• All competencies now characterized as action

items• Examples:• Demonstrate how to utilize contemporary

business and technology…• Model and apply the skills needed to provide

effective patient…• Direct the appropriate and ethical use of…

Foundational Standards

Importance vs. Achieved

Biggest gaps: Development, Physiologic Processes, and Understanding Impact of Hearing Disorders

Standard 21: Required Knowledge and Competencies• Added to Foundations:

• “Explain and demonstrate the impact of genetics on the development and preservation of auditory function as well as the impact on the development of disorders of the auditory, vestibular, and related systems, across the lifespan.”

• Explain the psychological and neurological bases for auditory and vestibular dysfunction and remediation.

• Describe the science and methods, e.g. acoustical, pharmacological, etc., necessary for the prevention of hearing and balance disorders.

Diagnosis and Management

Importance vs. Achieved

Gaps across all areas of diagnosis, interpretation, critical thinking, prescription, treatment plans and

patient management

Standard 21: Required Knowledge and Competencies• Added to Diagnosis and Management:

• “Characterize and implement evidence-based practice methods to provide optimal outcomes for diagnosis and treatment of auditory and vestibular disorders.”

• Added to Communication:• “Advocate for patients needs by teaching self-advocacy

skills.”• “Model and apply the skills needed to provide effective

patient- and family-centered counseling to provide information, resources and evidence-based options for diagnosis and treatment. “

Communication and Professionalism

Importance vs. Achieved

Biggest gaps in Effective communication, Documentation, Professional ethics, Practice

management.

Standard 21: Required Knowledge and Competencies• Add to Professional Responsibilities and Values (examples)

• “Respect the unique cultures, values, roles/responsibilities, and expertise of other health professions, including the value of inter-professional education and collaboration for patient care.”

• “Describe the value of life-long learning in order to stay current with changing medical, technologic and business advances.”

• “Describe the appropriate and ethical use of audiology assistants in order to manage productivity and effectiveness within the scope of audiologic practice.

• “Demonstrate how to utilize contemporary business and technology processes in order to improve access to audiologic care.”

• “Clinical Instructors” is used instead of “preceptors, here and in other standards – more inclusive• Clinical instructors, particularly those not part

of the academic faculty, should have training in clinical instructional techniques• Quality of clinical instruction should be

monitored on an ongoing basis to assure students are meeting expected learning benchmarks

Standard 31: Number and Qualification of Clinical Instructors

Standard 33: Relationship between Academic Program and External Clinical Sites• The program must have a current written and

mutual agreement(s) …that describes… the expected student learning outcomes, the expectations for the quality of the student experience, the responsibilities of the student, the role of the clinical instructor(s),...

• Programs must be able to demonstrate ongoing monitoring of the quality of clinical instruction provided by the clinical sites.

• External clinical sites should know the expected learning outcomes.• Clinical sites must be monitored for quality, i.e.

meeting expected learning outcomes• Programs must demonstrate that this process is

ongoing

Standard 33: Relationship between Academic Program and External Clinical Sites

Standard 34: Public Disclosure• Programs must provide reliable

information to the public on their performance on a regular basis, including student achievement.

• This communication to the public must take place during specific points in the academic year, but on an annual basis at least.

• It also must be clearly identified on the program’s website or other publication for the public to easily see.

How can YOU provide input?• Draft standards will be sent for widespread peer

review in late Spring• Written input will be considered in final

standards

What are the next steps?• Here will be plenty of time for programs to

become familiar with the new standards over the next 1-2 years• New standards will be integrated into our

Computerized Accreditation Program (CAP) once approved• Final standards will be adopted for new

programs after a waiting period

Questions and Discussion