2021 Annual Accreditation Report
CAEP ID: | 10318 | AACTE SID: | 3210 |
Institution: | Montana State University - Bozeman | ||
Unit: | College of Education, Health & Human Development |
Section 1. EPP Profile
After reviewing and/or updating the Educator Preparation Provider's (EPP's) profile in AIMS, check the box to indicate that the information available is accurate.
1.1 In AIMS, the following information is current and accurate...
|
1.2 [For EPPs seeking Continuing CAEP Accreditation]. Please provide a link to your
webpage that demonstrates accurate representation of your Initial-Licensure Level
and/or Advanced-Level programs as reviewed and accredited by CAEP (NCATE or TEAC).
https://www.montana.edu/education/accreditation/TEaccreditation/iando.html
Section 2. Program Completers
2.1 How many candidates completed programs that prepared them to work in preschool through grade 12 settings during Academic Year 2019-2020 ?
Enter a numeric value for each textbox.
2.1.1 Number of completers in programs leading to initial teacher certification or licensure1 | 150 | ||
2.1.2 Number of completers in advanced programs or programs leading to a degree, endorsement, or some other credential that prepares the holder to serve in P-12 schools (Do not include those completers counted above.)2 | |||
124 | |||
Total number of program completers | 274 |
1 For a description of the scope for Initial-Licensure Programs, see Policy 3.01 in
the Accreditation Policy Manual
2 For a description of the scope for Advanced-Level Programs, see Policy 3.02 in the
Accreditation Policy Manual
Section 3. Substantive Changes
Have any of the following substantive changes occurred at your educator preparation provider or institution/organization during the 2019-2020 academic year?
3.1 Changes in the established mission or objectives of the institution/organization or the EPP
3.2 Any change in the legal status, form of control, or ownership of the EPP.
3.3 The addition of programs of study at a degree or credential level different from those that were offered when most recently accredited
3.4 The addition of courses or programs that represent a significant departure, in terms of either content or delivery, from those that were offered when most recently accredited
3.5 A contract with other providers for direct instructional services, including any teach-out agreements
Any change that means the EPP no longer satisfies accreditation standards or requirements:
3.6 Change in regional accreditation status
3.7 Change in state program approval
Section 4. Display of Annual Reporting Measures.
Annual Reporting Measures (CAEP Component 5.4 | A.5.4) | |||
Impact Measures (CAEP Standard 4) | Outcome Measures | ||
1. Impact on P-12 learning and development (Component 4.1) | 5. Graduation Rates (initial & advanced levels) | ||
2. Indicators of teaching effectiveness (Component 4.2) | 6. Ability of completers to meet licensing (certification) and any additional state requirements; Title II (initial & advanced levels) | ||
3. Satisfaction of employers and employment milestones (Component 4.3 | A.4.1) | 7. Ability of completers to be hired in education positions for which they have prepared (initial & advanced levels) | ||
4. Satisfaction of completers (Component 4.4 | A.4.2) | 8. Student loan default rates and other consumer information (initial & advanced levels) |
4.1 Provide a link or links that demonstrate data relevant to each of the Annual Reporting Measures are public-friendly and prominently displayed on the educator preparation provider's website.
Tag the Annual Reporting Measure(s) represented in the link above to the appropriate preparation level(s) (initial and/or advanced, as offered by the EPP) and corresponding measure number.
|
4.2 Summarize data and trends from the data linked above, reflecting on the prompts below.
What has the provider learned from reviewing its Annual Reporting Measures over the past three years? Discuss any emerging, long-term, expected, or unexpected trends? |
After four years of continuous improvement work in preparation for our CAEP/Montana Board of Public Education Accreditation site visit in Fall 2022, we note the following trends: 1) Nearly all of our students (across nineteen teaching majors/minors) meet or exceed
formative and summative benchmarks in content and pedagogical knowledge.
|
Section 5. Areas for Improvement, Weaknesses, and/or Stipulations
Summarize EPP activities and the outcomes of those activities as they relate to correcting the areas cited in the last Accreditation Action/Decision Report.
This section is blank because MSU—Bozeman's Teacher Education Program had no Areas for Improvement, Weaknesses, and/or Stipulations cited in the last Accreditation Action/Decision Report.
Section 6. Continuous Improvement
CAEP Standard 5
The provider maintains a quality assurance system comprised of valid data from multiple measures, including evidence of candidates' and completers' positive impact on P-12 student learning and development. The provider supports continuous improvement that is sustained and evidence-based, and that evaluates the effectiveness of its completers. The provider uses the results of inquiry and data collection to establish priorities, enhance program elements and capacity, and test innovations to improve completers' impact on P-12 student learning and development.
CAEP Standard 5, Component 5.3
The provider regularly and systematically assesses performance against its goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, tests innovations and the effects of selection criteria on subsequent progress and completion, and uses results to improve program elements and processes.
6.1 Summarize any data-driven EPP-wide or programmatic modifications, innovations, or changes planned, worked on, or completed in the last academic year. This is an opportunity to share targeted continuous improvement efforts your EPP is proud of. Focus on one to three major efforts the EPP made and the relationship among data examined, changes, and studying the results of those changes.
- Describe how the EPP regularly and systematically assessed its performance against its goals or the CAEP standards.
- What innovations or changes did the EPP implement as a result of that review?
- How are progress and results tracked? How will the EPP know the degree to which changes are improvements?
The following questions were created from the March 2016 handbook for initial-level programs sufficiency criteria for standard 5, component 5.3 and may be helpful in cataloguing continuous improvement.
The following thoughts are derived from the September 2017 handbook for advanced-level
programs
|
Describe how the EPP regularly and systematically assessed its performance against its goals or the CAEP standards. Our TEP clinical/instructional faculty attend biweekly program meetings where we present data and subsequent analysis which leads to discussions, plans for continuous improvement, and implementation of those improvements. What innovations or changes did the EPP implement as a result of that review? Our major effort in 2019-2020 was the development of a program-level learning outcome in support of professionalism. In Fall 2019 our program meetings focused on identifying issues and concerns related to professionalism, ways that instructors teach and assess the content throughout coursework and field experiences, and finally, advancing three potential learning outcomes for a faculty vote. The chosen learning outcome was: Teacher candidates will act in accordance with the professional and ethical standards, norms, and dispositions of the district within which they are working, the university within which they are learning, and the profession of teaching. Department and college administrators then met with university legal counsel and the Dean of Students to create a comprehensive accountability process for students, and instructors are working on better incorporating the learning outcome into all TEP courses. Please see the attached document, TEP Student Support Process. How are progress and results tracked? How will the EPP know the degree to which changes are improvements? The MSU-Bozeman Teacher Education Program (TEP) Program Assessment System (PAS) draws upon assessments of students at various points in their program. These assessments provide data for each teaching major, as well as the aggregate, to identify TEP elements to be improved. The PAS will be replaced by Via by Watermark in Fall 2021, allowing faculty and staff to visualize and analyze course- and program-level data on demand through seamless integration into our learning management system, Brightspace by D2L. In the past, assessments have been aligned with the program’s own conceptual framework. Our TEP re-affirmed using Charlotte Danielson’s 2007 Framework for Teaching for clinical experience evaluation in Spring 2017. We also more intentionally aligned the TEP with InTASC standards and the state of Montana’s Professional Educator Preparation Program Standards outlined in the Administrative Rules of Montana. This work took a full two years and was completed in Spring 2019. Data Analysis for Continuous Improvement
Our current TEP assessments (all majors) are: Signature Assignments
Danielson-based Observation Tool
Praxis II Content Exams
Reflective Educator Project
Completer Survey
Employer Survey |
Tag the standard(s) or component(s) to which the data or changes apply.
2.2 Partners co-select, prepare, evaluate, support, and retain high-quality clinical
educators 2.3 Partners design high-quality clinical experiences 3.5 Candidate positive impacts on P-12 students 3.6 Candidates understand the expectation of the profession 4.3 Employer satisfaction 4.4 Completer satisfaction 5.1 Effective quality assurance system that monitors progress using multiple measures 5.2 Quality assurance system relies on measures yielding reliable, valid, and actionable data. 5.3 Results for continuous program improvement are used 5.4 Measures of completer impact are analyzed, shared and used in decision-making 5.5 Relevant stakeholders are involved in program evaluation A.1.1 Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions A.1.2 Professional Responsibilities A.2.2 Clinical Experiences |
Upload data results or documentation of data-driven changes.
TEP_Student_Support_Process.pdf
6.2 Would the provider be willing to share highlights, new initiatives, assessments, research, scholarship, or service activities during a CAEP Conference or in other CAEP Communications?
Yes No
6.3 Optional Comments
Section 8: Preparer's Authorization
Preparer's authorization.By checking the box below, I indicate that I am authorized by the EPP to complete the 2021 EPP Annual Report.
I am authorized to complete this report.
Report Preparer's Information
Name: | Ann Ewbank | ||
Position | Department Head | ||
Phone: | 4069945788 | ||
E-mail: | ann.ewbank@montana.edu |
I understand that all the information that is provided to CAEP from EPPs seeking initial accreditation, continuing accreditation or having completed the accreditation process is considered the property of CAEP and may be used for training, research and data review. CAEP reserves the right to compile and issue data derived from accreditation documents.
CAEP Accreditation Policy
Policy 6.01 Annual Report
An EPP must submit an Annual Report to maintain accreditation or accreditation-eligibility. The report is opened for data entry each year in January. EPPs are given 90 days from the date of system availability to complete the report.
CAEP is required to collect and apply the data from the Annual Report to:
- Monitor whether the EPP continues to meet the CAEP Standards between site reviews.
- Review and analyze stipulations and any AFIs submitted with evidence that they were addressed.
- Monitor reports of substantive changes.
- ]Collect headcount completer data, including for distance learning programs.
- Monitor how the EPP publicly reports candidate performance data and other consumer information on its website.
CAEP accreditation staff conduct annual analysis of AFIs and/or stipulations and the decisions of the Accreditation Council to assess consistency.
Failure to submit an Annual Report will result in referral to the Accreditation Council for review. Adverse action may result.
Policy 8.05 Misleading or Incorrect Statements
The EPP is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of all information submitted by the EPP for accreditation purposes, including program reviews, self-study reports, formative feedback reports and addendums and site review report responses, and information made available to prospective candidates and the public. In particular, information displayed by the EPP pertaining to its accreditation and Title II decision, term, consumer information, or candidate performance (e.g., standardized test results, job placement rates, and licensing examination rates) must be accurate and current.
When CAEP becomes aware that an accredited EPP has misrepresented any action taken by CAEP with respect to the EPP and/or its accreditation, or uses accreditation reports or materials in a false or misleading manner, the EPP will be contacted and directed to issue a corrective communication. Failure to correct misleading or inaccurate statements can lead to adverse action.
Acknowledge