By: Blake West, Ed.D.
Senior Policy Analyst, National Education Association Center for Great Public Schools – Teacher Quality

Some say that the review and final decision-making work of the Accreditation Council (AC) is a daunting experience.  It is understandable that such a high-stakes decision would generate angst, but knowing a bit more about what the AC actually does might also suggest how this work can be integral to the continuous improvement of an Educator Preparation Provider (EPP).   Consider these three elements of CAEP’s work. 

Process

For many AC members, their work has its roots in the legacy organizations that united to form CAEP and they bring the best elements of those legacy process into CAEP’s AC.

For example, AC consideration of an EPP begins as a panel (generally 3-5 people) of Councilors reviews all case materials for the EPP in light of CAEP standards.  Those familiar with NCATE legacy work will see that a new element of EPP participation has been added to this review… a representative of the EPP, a representative from the State agency responsible for overseeing EPPs in that state, and the site review chair are ALL able to be present in person or virtually during the panel’s discussions.  This allows the panel to ask clarifying questions and to solicit additional explanation from these key participants. 

In order to ensure consistency across all decisions/cases, this first panel presents its recommendations to a second panel for validation and/or recommended changes.  Next, if the joint panel finds any standards unmet, they make yet a third detailed presentation to the full AC before final voting takes place.  As part of the Council’s work, they will also analyze all “Areas for Improvement” and “Stipulations” cited for all cases to ensure consistent application of the standards.

Even as the transition from legacy to CAEP cases continues, the AC will use part of each meeting engaged in professional learning to improve its work. For example, the AC will calibrate its decisions by conducting blind reviews of exemplary cases.  

People

CAEP standards writers, site reviewersors, and AC members share some crucial characteristics:  they are all volunteers representing the various stakeholders in the accreditation process.  They are our colleagues… faculty from EPPs, staff from State Departments of Education, P-12 practitioners, as well as representatives of CCSSO, AACTE, and others.  

Many of the people volunteering in the CAEP accreditation process are experienced reviewers from the legacy pathways.  Regardless of past experience, they are also all undergoing (or have completed) extensive training in applying CAEP standards, data analysis, assessment quality, and more.  Training is not a singular event, though.  A regular part of CAEP meetings moving forward will include additional professional learning as panels utilize blind review of sample cases to ensure they are reaching consistent decisions and applying standards with fidelity.

Participation

Possibly the most important factor in the quality of AC decisions made and CAEP’s influence for continuous improvement of educator preparation is this:  we, practitioners in our various roles, MUST become participants in the work.  For example:

  • Faculty and EPP staff need to participate in setting goals, implementing improvement strategies, collecting and analyzing data, and taking ownership for program quality.  It is not just the work of the CAEP coordinator or a select committee.  Accreditation CAN be a systemic tool to achieve excellence if all are fully engaged.
  • Graduates, the P-12 community, EPP faculty, policy makers, etc. must all assist, helping the EPP gather multiple measures of meaningful data, working to ensure that data is a source of growth for all in the business of P-12 education.  We must also all work to ensure that data is not oversimplified, used in a punitive ways rather than for growth, or extended/applied beyond its reasonable statistical applicability. 
  • EPPs need to utilize feedback given throughout the accreditation cycle, then take advantage of the opportunity to write rejoinders and participate in the deliberation by the AC panel.  

These are only a few ways for all to participate in CAEP’s work.  Possibly the most important participation is responding to CAEP’s call for volunteers to serve as site reviewers, on committees, or on the AC.  Volunteers have the opportunity to grow professionally and gain expertise in the work of accreditation.  

More importantly, CAEP participation is an opportunity to take ownership of our profession.  While many voices stand ready with quick fixes and advice about how to prepare the next generation of educators, CAEP is uniting people and building inertia for this crucial and complex task. Participating in CAEP’s work helps to ensure that every educator enters the profession ready to meet the needs of the diverse learners in our classrooms.  This is work worth doing.