Graduate
programs intending to develop highly qualified educational leaders must seek to
address Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP)
accreditation standards (2013) to identify and develop competencies that
optimize educational leadership. Teacher
preparation programs must be responsive to accreditation standards, intended to
promote effective leadership and optimize student success within schools (CAEP,
2013). Following de facto consolidation
into the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP, 2013), more than 900 educator
preparation providers currently participate as providers currently accredited
by either the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) or the Teacher Education Accreditation
Council (TEAC) CAEP is now the sole
specialized accreditor for educator preparation.
For
the purpose of the accreditation of educator preparation providers, NCATE and
TEAC are now subsidiaries of CAEP. NCATE
and TEAC maintain their recognition by the U.S.
Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation
(CHEA). Future accreditation will be under CAEP,
effectively phasing out the subsidiary councils over time (CAEP, 2013).
Founded
in 1997, the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) is a nonprofit
organization dedicated to improving academic degree programs for professional
educators that will teach and lead in schools, pre-K through grade 12. The TEAC accreditation process forms the basis
for CAEP’s Inquiry Brief Accreditation Pathway, identifying the educator
preparation provider’s case that it prepares competent, caring, and qualified
professional educators (TEAC, 2013. The
process requires the educator preparation provider present evidence to support
its case. The accreditation process
examines and verifies the evidence (CAEP, 2013).
The standards used by the Teacher Education Accreditation
Council (TEAC) help frame teacher education and educational leadership programs
at institutions of higher learning. Educator
preparation providers include traditional institutions of higher education, as
well as alternative pathways such as residency programs (CAEP, 2013).
CAEP,
NCATE, and TEAC all expect faculty to hold a terminal degree or possess
exceptional expertise while modeling high quality instructional and
professional practices. The
qualifications of faculty and teaching quality must align with measurable
benchmarks of an effective educational program. “Teacher quality—knowledge and
effectiveness—is the number one school based factor in student achievement”
(NCATE, 2003, para. 9).
To
sustain success and seek improvement, faculty within educator preparation
providers should systematically evaluate colleagues and collaborate to optimize
professional development (NCATE, 2003; TEAC, 2003). The mindset driving sustained success and
continuous improvement should be if better is possible then good is not enough.
The following five standards and two
recommendations guide the endeavor toward CAEP’s goals to raise the performance
of candidates as practitioners in the nation’s P-12 schools and thereby raise
the stature of the entire profession. Pursuit
of these goals requires teacher preparation programs support any claims of
quality in each of the following:
Standard
1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge
Standard
2: Clinical Partnerships and Practice
Standard
3: Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity
Standard
4: Program Impact
Standard
5: Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement
Recommendation:
Annual Reporting and CAEP Monitoring
Recommendation:
Levels of Accreditation Decisions (CAEP, 2013, p. 2)
Pursuit of the goals identified by
the CAEP standards and recommendations require educator preparation providers
willingly reflect, monitor, and adjust programs to meet increased expectation
(CAEP, 2013). The following six
professional standards reflect the significant alignment between TEAC and NCATE
expectations:
1.
unit governance and resources,
2.
faculty qualifications, performance, and development,
3.
candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions,
4.
assessment system and unit evaluation,
5.
field experience and clinical practice,
6.
diversity.
The
primary professional standards guide the educator preparation providers to
willingly reflect, monitor, and adjust programs to meet increased expectation
of the accreditation process. Yet, teachers
exhibit varying awareness of the standards (Rodenberg, 2006), so it is
uncertain how TEAC, NCATE, or CAEP professional standards promote relevance to
actual professional development. Educators
would benefit from increased awareness of pedagogical research and best
practices that may inform their practices. In this regard, schools and districts will need
to provide high quality, research-based staff development relative to effective
practices (Marzano,
Pickering, & Pollock, 2001). As
life-long learners, teachers need to have effective instruction that includes
modeling, practice, feedback, and reinforcement (Joyce & Showers, 2002). These opportunities can be evaluated by
stakeholders in relation to school climate using the Five P structure based on
Invitational Education theory (Schmidt,
2007).
In a
meta-analysis of studies that examined aspects of Highly Qualified Teachers, Darling-Hammond
(2004) codified five quantifiable attributes that frequently appeared to
correlate teacher qualifications with student achievement. These included:
1.
General academic and verbal abilities;
2.
Subject matter knowledge;
3.
Pedagogical knowledge as reflected by teacher education
coursework or preparation experiences;
4.
Teaching experience; and
5.
Qualifications measured by teacher certification, which
included most of the preceding factors.
Quality
educators exhibit qualitative characteristics. Specifically, an educator’s intuition
correlates student actions to effective teacher reactions or proactive
responses. This requires teachers know
about children, pedagogy, curriculum, thereby making these elements effectively,
efficiently, and logically, interact (Darling-Hammond,
2004).
It
remains unknown how emotional intelligence skills and behaviors in the
workplace relates to intuition. Stronge’s
(2002) meta-analysis focused upon "the teacher as a person" (p.
12). The reviewed studies identified instructional
and classroom management strategies as key to teacher effectiveness, usually emphasizing
the teacher's affective characteristics more than their pedagogical practice (Stronge
et al., 2003).
The measurement of teacher performance remains difficult. Teaching candidate credentials are generally
easier to observe and analyze. Teacher
dispositions identified with highly qualified teachers include collegiality,
self-reflection, collaboration, interactive skills, and reflective adjustment
to personal and professional practice (Miller & Davidson, 2006). These characteristics may be essential for
promoting the defined autonomy and effective collaboration evidenced within
highly effective schools (Marzano
& Waters, 2009). Informal and
formal assessment of these dispositions during teacher preparation and
educational leadership programs will continue based on accreditation and
certification requirements (CAEP, 2013; NCATE, 2010; TEAC, 2010).
References:
Council
for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (2013). CAEP Accreditation
Standards. Retrieved from http://caepnet.org/caep-accreditation-standards/
Darling-Hammond,
L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers College Record,
106(6), 1047–1085.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00372.x
Joyce,
B.R. & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development.
Arlington, VA: ASCD. ISBN: 0871206749
Marzano,
R., Pickering, D. & Pollock, J. (2001). Classroom instruction that
works: Research-based
strategies for
increasing student achievement (first ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R. & Waters, T.(2009). District leadership
that works. Bloomington, In:
Solution
Tree Press
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School
leadership that works:
From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and
Curriculum
Development. Retrieved from:
Miller, K.W. & Davidson, D.M.(2006).What makes a secondary
school science and/or
mathematics
teacher “highly qualified”? Science Educator, 15 (1), 56-59.
Rodenberg,
J. K. (2006). How teachers define "highly qualified" for
themselves and their profession.
(Order No. 3218194, University of San
Diego and San Diego State University). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, , 158-158 p. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304913901?accountid=7374.
(304913901).
Schmidt, J. J. (2007). Elements of
diversity in invitational practice and research. Journal
of Invitational Theory & Practice, 13, 16-23. Retrieved from:
Stronge,
J. H. (2002). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision
and Curriculum
Development. ISBN 0871206633
To cite:
Anderson, C.J.
(July 31, 2016) Accreditation standards: Promoting
effective leadership and optimizing
student success [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/
