Supporting Innovation and Collaboration · 2019-10-23 · 10/23/19 1 Quality Assurance Supporting Innovation and Collaboration Presentation to the Iowa Association of Colleges for

10/23/19

1

Quality Assurance Supporting Innovation and Collaboration

Presentation to the Iowa Association of Colleges for Teacher EducationOctober 25, 2019Ames, Iowa

Mark LaCelle-Peterson, President/CEOAssociation for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation

Always improving together

1

What’s the point of national accreditation?

1. Where did AAQEP come from and how has it developed?

2. Why bother? Who can benefit from national accreditation?

3. What are AAQEP’s Standards and evidence requirements?

4. Can accreditation processes support growth and innovation?

5. Questions and conversation

Slides and more good stuff available at: www.aaqep.org/IACTE-Oct19

2

http://www.aaqep.org/IACTE-Oct19

10/23/19

2

Where did AAQEP come from?The Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation was founded in 2017 by professionals in educator preparation, both campus-based and state-authority-based, to ensure quality educator preparation through collaboration and innovation.


3

43 individuals:

v34 faculty, deans, coordinators

v2 PK-12 educators

v4 reps from 3 SEAs (HI, MI, UT)v3 AAQEP initial staff

v39 institutions in 14 states

Working in three groups: Expectations, Process, Consistency

4

Renewing a conversation—2017


4



10/23/19

3

AAQEP Today: 95 members, 9 accredited programs

5

16 states,Guam, & Canada

Membership includes:• Initial• Advanced• Traditional• Alternative • Online• Large, medium, small• Public• Independent• Proprietary• Community colleges

5

Accreditation as a Professional Conversation

Accreditation: a profession’s conversation with internal and external stakeholders on key questions about quality:

QUA

LITY


7


10/23/19

4

Association’s Vision and

Mission

VISIONExcellent, effective, innovative educator preparation that is committed to evidence-based improvement, engages with the P-20 system, and holds high public confidence.

MISSIONTo promote and recognize quality educator preparation that strengthens the education system’s ability to serve all students, schools, and communities.


8

AAQEP’s Operating Principles

in Practice

• Promote provider collaboration through cohorts• Focus on improvement and innovation with standards• Partner with providers and state authorities (duh!)• Recognize significance of context and mission in

reporting expectations and site visit protocols• Serve all providers and all types of programs equitably• Seek efficiencies everywhere (that’s for you, deans!)• Share ideas and innovations broadly with permission


10



10/23/19

5

The Value of Accreditation(Why bother?)

11

11

What’s the potential value of accreditation?

For the field of educator preparation

• Credibility--Public trust through third-party validation of quality claims

• Stronger preparation through shared knowledge of successful practices

• Expanded repertoire of effective models and proven practices

• Better measures and improvement processes

Preparing effective educators to serve students, schools, communities12


12


10/23/19

6


For individual preparation providers

• Strengthened programs through use of a structured review process

• Access to knowledge of successful practices through collaboration

• Stronger stakeholder relationships through data sharing

• Improved effectiveness through deeper local engagement

Preparing effective educators to serve students, schools, communities

13Slides and more good stuff available at: www.aaqep.org/IACTE-Oct19

13


For professionals engaged in assessment and accreditation

• Professional development and growth through participation

• Access to professional learning experiences

• Expansion of professional collegial network

• Outlet for scholarship and research

Preparing effective educators to serve students, schools, communities


14



10/23/19

7

What will it take to realize the potential?

• Standards that are clear, compelling, and worth working toward, together.

• Evidence that is clear, compelling, and inspires confidence and improvement

• Processes that support and enhance internal processes and practices

• Opportunities to communicate regularly with other providers & colleagues

• Flexible frameworks that support multiple stakeholder interactions

• Professional learning opportunities through multiple modalities

• Engagement through multiple volunteer roles15

15

StandardsFoundational expectations, shared aspirations, contextual challenges


20


10/23/19

8

Stan

dard

s

21

21

AAQEP’s Four Standards1. Program completers perform as professional educators with the

capacity to support success for all learners.

2. Program completers adapt to working in a variety of contextsand grow as professionals.

3. The program has the capacity to ensure that its completers meetstandards 1 and 2.

4. Program practices strengthen the P-20 education system in light of local needs and in keeping with the program’s mission.


22


10/23/19

9

Again as essential questions—compelling?

1. At the end of the program, are completers ready to fill their target professional role effectively?

2. Were completers prepared to work in diverse contexts, have they done so successfully, and are they growing as professionals?

3. Does the program have the capacity to ensure that its completers meet Standards 1 and 2?

4. Do program practices strengthen the P-20 education system in light of local needs and in keeping with the program’s mission?

23

23

Candidate/Completer Performance: Standards 1 & 2Confidence that completers perform as effective educators and continue to grow


24


10/23/19

10

Standard 1: Candidate/Completer Performance

Program completers perform as professional educators with the capacity to support success for all learners.


26

Standard 1 — Candidate/Completer Performance

Program completers perform as professional educators with the capacity to support success for all learners

Candidates and completers exhibit the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions of competent, caring, and effective professional educators. Successful candidate performance requires knowledge of learners, context, and content. Candidates demonstrate the ability to plan for and enact and/or support instruction and assessment that is differentiated and culturally responsive.


27



10/23/19

11

Aspects of Standard 1 (dimensions of the whole)

28

Evidence of Completer Performance includes

Content/pedagogical/professional knowledge (relevant to license)

Learners / learning theory, including SEL

Cultural competence

Assessment and data literacy

Positive learning/work environment

Professional dispositions/behaviors

Each standard includes six aspects of performance or practice that must be part of the evidence set. Evidence for each standard is judged holistically.

28

Standard 1 — Candidate/Completer PerformanceEvidence for this standard will include:•multiple measures, •multiple perspectives, including

program faculty, p-12 partners, program completers, graduates’ employers,

• direct measures, and evidence of • performance in clinical setting appropriate to program

Note that the evidence includes in-program & post-program measures.29

29

10/23/19

12

Standard 2Completer Professional Competence and Growth: Aspects and Evidence


30

Standard 2: Completer Professional Competence and Growth

Program completers adapt to working in a variety of contexts and

grow as professionals.


31



10/23/19

13

Standard 2 — Completer ProfessionalCompetence and Growth

Program completers adapt to working in a variety of contextsand grow as professionals.

Program completers engage in professional practice in educational settings and show that they have the skills and abilities to do so in a variety of additional settings and community/cultural contexts.

For example, candidates must have broad and general knowledge of the impact of culture and language on learning, yet they cannot, within the context of any given program, experience working with the entire diversity of student identities, or in all types of school environments.

32

32


33

Evidence of Completer Professional Competence and Growth

Engage local school and cultural community, caregivers and familiesCulturally responsive practice with diverse learnersCan develop productive learning environments in diverse contextsSupport their P12 students’ increasing global perspectivesGrow professionally throughout their careersCollaborate for professional learning with colleagues


33

10/23/19

14

Standard 2 — Completer ProfessionalCompetence and Growth

Evidence for this standard will show that program completers:

• have engaged successfully in relevant professional practice,

• are equipped with strategies and reflective habits that enable them to serve effectively in a variety of educational settings appropriate to the credential or degree sought,

• have, in fact, done so—using whatever evidence can be gathered.34

34

Thinking About EvidencePotentially Overlapping Evidence: Expectations for Standards 1 and 2


35


10/23/19

15

Evidence Requirements and PrioritiesMultiple measures with reasonable continuity

Quality of evidence must be investigated and shared

Priority is given to direct performance measures

Down-stream data valued for improvement purposes

Differentiation of evidence by initial, advanced, etc.

Assessments appropriate to program (not necessarily across all)

36

Evidence for Standards 1 and 2

37

Completer Performance

Fundamental Expectations:Comprehensive Evidence to Assess Quality Holistically

Standard 1: Candidate/Completer PerformanceContent/pedagogical knowledge Learners / learning theory, including SELCultural competence/ Culturally responsiveAssessment and data literacyPositive learning/work environmentProfessional dispositions/behaviors

Contextual Challenges:Compelling Evidence to

Guide and Inform

Standard 2: Completer Professional Competence & GrowthEngage local community, caregivers and familiesCulturally responsive practice w diverse learnersDevelop productive environments in diverse contextsSupport P12 students’ global perspectivesGrow professionally throughout their careersCollaborate for professional learning

37

10/23/19

16

Evidence on Candidate/Completer Performance

Evidence expectations are appropriate to measure & sample

Multiple measures and perspectives, including:• Faculty (grades, assignments, dispositions clinical

ratings/evals) • P-12 partners (clinical ratings/evaluations, dispositions) • Program completers (efficacy surveys, focus groups for

information, not evaluation)• Graduates’ employers (surveys, focus groups for

information, not evaluation)

Direct measures • Evidence of performance in clinical settings

38

38

What would we like to know about our

graduates?

Did they get jobs?Were they prepared to do the work, and to grow in it?

Did they have the content and pedagogical knowledge they needed to teach effectively?

Could they create good assessments and use data from all sources to differentiate and improve their instruction?

Could they teach the diverse learners they met, and interact well with the many types of families, in many types of communities?

Did they stick with it? Are they still employed, still growing?


39


10/23/19

17

What evidence might provide

answers?

Official statistics on placement, retention, performance• But such information, if available, is always partial and

of variable qualitySurveys of completers and their employers

• States sometimes provide; institutional response rates can be ‘abysmal’

Case studies and focus groups of local completers• These contacts can provide useful insights, but for a

limited sample


41

Re-framing Follow-up:

Toward UsefulFeedback

1. Focus on completers has been driven by accountability questions grounded in a deficit view of educator preparation (NCLB, RttT)

2. Purpose of data collection has been defined as evaluation of program effectiveness through general metrics (retention, ratings)

3. Evidence infrastructure and chain of reasoning are not up to the task----

4. Focusing on completers’ perspectives on their efficacy and programmatic strengths can support continuous improvement

5. Focusing on completers’ ongoing experiences can support programmatic renewal and innovation


42



10/23/19

18

Engaging completers and

their employers, and external

stakeholders

43

Follow-up with program completers and their employers is critically important to program improvement efforts.

Survey approaches have been found to have widely variable yield and impact. New strategies may offer greater benefits.

• Panel studies of select program completers may allow for ongoing contact and insight.

• Focus groups with local, long-term collaborators may yield better feedback and strengthen partnerships.

• Technology may afford new options in maintaining contact, getting feedback, and providing support to completers (e.g. apps, pulse surveys, online communities, LinkedIn, etc.)


43

Program practices: Standards 3 &4Confidence that quality will be sustained, enhanced, improved


44



10/23/19

19

Accreditation’s two larger

decision questions

• Is there credible and sufficient evidence of program quality?

• Is there sufficient evidence of program capacity and institutional commitment to conclude that the level of quality will persist?


45

AAQEP’s Four Standards1. Program completers perform as professional educators with the capacity to

support success for all learners.

2. Program completers adapt to working in a variety of contexts and grow as professionals.

3. The program has the capacity to ensure that its completersmeet standards 1 and 2.

4. Program practices strengthen the P-20 education system in light of local needs and in keeping with the program’s mission.


46



10/23/19

20

Standard 3Program Capacity Fundamentals: Process Documentation and Improvement

48

Standard 3: Quality Program Practices

The program has the capacity to ensure that its completers meet

Standards 1 and 2.


49


10/23/19

21

Standard 3 — Quality Program PracticesThe program has the capacity to ensure

that its completers meet standards 1 and 2.

Preparation programs ensure that candidates, upon completion, are ready to engage in professional practice, to adapt to a variety of professional settings, and to grow throughout their careers. Effective program practices include: consistent offering of coherent curricula; high quality, diverse clinical experiences; dynamic, mutually-beneficial partnerships with stakeholders; and comprehensive and transparent quality assurance processes informed by trustworthy evidence. Each aspect of the program is appropriate to its context and to the credential or degree sought.

50

50


51

Evidence of Quality Program Practices will include

Coherent curriculum (in Appendix C)

Quality clinical experiences

Stakeholder engagement

Admission/monitoring process linked to success (Appendix A)

Internal quality assurance/continuous improvement (Appendix D)

Capacity for quality and institutional commitment (Appendix C)


51

10/23/19

22

Standard 4Program Engagement: Setting Agendas and Engaging Partners


52

Standard 4: Program Engagement in System Improvement

Program practices strengthen the P-20 education system in light of local

needs and in keeping with the program’s mission.


53



10/23/19

23

Standard 4 — Program Engagement inSystem Improvement

Program practices strengthen the P20 education system in light of local needs and in keeping with the program’s mission.

The program is committed to and invests in strengthening and improving the education profession and the P20 education system. Each program’s context (or multiple contexts) provides particular opportunities to engage the field’s shared challenges and to foster and support innovation. Engagement with critical issues facing the field is essential and must be contextualized. Sharing results of contextualized engagement and innovation support the field’s collective effort to address education’s most pressing challenges through improvement and innovation.

54

54


55

Evidence of Program Engagement in System Improvement

Engages stakeholders to support schools and reduce disparitiesSupports diverse educator workforce and address state and local needsSupports completer career entry and growth (Appendix B)Uses available evidence on completers for program improvementMeets relevant regulatory requirements (general, and Appendix E)Investigates effectiveness vis-à-vis institutional mission (Appendix F)


55

10/23/19

24

Process elementsClear communication through cohorts, timely formative support through proposals


56

Familiar Accreditation Fundamentals

57

ProcessSelf-study is the heart of quality

assurance and improvement

Peer review provided in off- and on-site reviews

DecisionsAccreditation decisions rely on

professional judgment

Full accreditation term of 7 years, but decisions may include identification of

quality issues and shorter terms

57


10/23/19

25

AAQEP Process Distinctives

• Cohorts provide collaboration and support

• AAQEP liaisons provide continuity in communication and support

• Proposal process provides feedback and clarifies expectations

Support quality

assurance review process

59

59

Process Distinctives: Cohorts and Liaisons

60

• provide a supportive learning community

• foster a shared, collaborative space

Cohort calls serve to:

• facilitate monthly calls• provide AAQEP updates and

continuous support

Liaisonsserve to:

60

10/23/19

26

Brief overview of the provider and its context

Measures to be used for Standards 1

& 2

Studies of measures’

validity, reliability, fairness

Description of context

and of any innovations

The Proposal: 4 Key Components

AAQEP’s proposal process allows providers to examine processes and data, develop strategies to address challenges, receive feedback, and contribute to their case

record.

61

Process Distinctive: the Proposal

How is the proposal reviewed and what role does it play?• Peer reviewers provide 1 or 2 rounds of feedback

• Written feedback is provided using a common review framework• Follow-up conversations may be arranged for

discussion or to respond to feedback• AAQEP reviews final proposal for completeness• Proposal and summary of feedback becomes part of case

record

62

62

10/23/19

27

Abbreviated Process Timeline

63

Upon joining 24-36 months prior to site visit

6 monthsprior to site visit

2 monthsprior to site visit

Assigned to cohort and

liaison

OPTIONAL proposal provided, feedback

exchanged

Quality Assurance

Report turned in

Off-site virtual review

site visit

63

Getting Started with AAQEPAAQEP members have valued:• Support offered through workshops, consultation, cohorts• Local workshops that allow team participation/collaboration• Cohort participation which provides monthly, responsive support• Current members willingness to share experiences and advice• Capacity for training site visitors and scheduling that is in place• Staff experience in educator prep, accreditation, and state policy


68


10/23/19

28

AAQEP benefits to providers•Challenging, context-sensitive standards•Participation in a collaborative national conversation• Engagement with peer institutions through cohorts• Early feedback through the proposal process•Access to qualified and responsive staff•Consistency across reviews and reviewers•No-cost partnership with state (free state access)

69

76Registration Now Open76

10/23/19

29

Follow AAQEP on Social Media

77

twitter.com/aaqep1

linkedin.com/company/aaqep

77

What more would you like to know? Questions and discussion: Quality assurance and collaboration

78

10/23/19

30

Questions?

79

• Visit www.aaqep.org for updates and events• Questions or ideas?

Contact us at: [email protected]@aaqep.org

Thank you!79

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Supporting Innovation and Collaboration · 2019-10-23 · 10/23/19 1 Quality Assurance Supporting Innovation and Collaboration Presentation to the Iowa Association of Colleges for