The Accreditation Cycle involves the educator preparation providers in continuous improvement and demonstration that they meet the high standards of quality required to improve P-12 student learning.
Program and State Review Process
All providers seeking CAEP accreditation must complete program review, which states use to examine the content and efficacy of preparation in the different preparation fields for teachers, school leaders, school psychologists, reading specialists, librarians, and other school professionals. States define the program review option available to providers as part of the CAEP partnership agreement.
Update Message on the EPP Annual Report (January 2017)
Each year providers submit annual reports to CAEP that gather common data for eight annual measures. These measures demonstrate impact around student learning, teacher effectiveness, employer and completer satisfaction, and specific outcomes and consumer information, such as graduation, licensure, employment, and student loan default rates. These data are useful to multiple audiences. They inform CAEP about the degree to which providers continue to meet CAEP Standards between accreditation visits. The data also provide important information for the benefit of consumers. Providers can use the data in their self-studies to analyze trends and demonstrate their use in their continuous improvement efforts.
The gathering of evidence is an ongoing process integrated into the provider’s own quality assurance systems. Throughout the accreditation cycle, providers gather and organize evidence to make a case that their educator preparation programs meet CAEP standards. The Self-study Report is the collection of evidence and supporting narrative which forms the basis of the accreditation review and is the first source of information for the CAEP Visitor Team.
After providers submit their self-study report, a formative review occurs for providers across all three pathways. CAEP assigns a Visitor Team of trained peer reviewers to conduct a formative offsite review in which they explore the quality and depth of evidence that providers use to make their case for meeting standards and determine the focus of the site review.
After the formative review, the team then conducts a two- to three-day site review to review evidence, verify data, and examine pedagogical artifacts (e.g., lesson plans, student work samples, and videos). During the visit, the team also interviews provider leaders, faculty, mentor teachers, students, P-12 administrators, and others. The Visitor Team identifies the extent to which evidence supports each standard, including any particular strengths or deficiencies. The Visitor Team provides a written report to the provider and the Accreditation Council that includes a summary team evaluation of the completeness, quality and strength of evidence for each standard.