Reviewer Training for Onsite Program Review 1. Welcome & Introductions 2.
Reviewer Training 2011. Welcome & Introductions Co-Chairs.
-
Upload
gilbert-ramsey -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Reviewer Training 2011. Welcome & Introductions Co-Chairs.
Reviewer Training
2011
WelcomeWelcome& Introductions& Introductions
Co-Chairs
Purposeful Supportive Collegial Interactive Demonstrating integrity Focused on evidence Identifying continuous improvement Confidential
General Education (Ed 609.01) Professional Education (Ed 610.02) “Unit” Standards (C-I-A-R)
◦ Curriculum
◦ Instruction (Including Student Teaching)
◦ Assessment (Program & Candidate)
◦ Resources
Reviewed by co-chairs w. input from team
Individual Endorsements◦ Early Childhood (Ed 612.03)◦ Elementary Education K-8 (Ed 612.04)◦ Life Science gr. 7-12 (Ed 612.25)
plus Science “General” Requirements (Ed 612.23)
◦ Middle Level Science gr. 5-9 (Ed. 612.22)◦ School Principal (Ed. 614.04)
Reviewed by individual program reviewers w. support from co-chairs
Standards are developed by the Professional Standards Board and approved by the State Board of Education.
Ed 61X.XX NAME OF ENDORSEMENT RATING: On Standard Or Standard Not Met
RATIONALE (Required)Describe the reviewed evidence that led to this rating.
RECOMMENDATION(Required if standard is “not met.”)
COMMENDATIONS (Optional)
Review Evidence of Teaching and Learning
◦Candidate work samples◦Course materials◦Direct observations◦Records and documents◦Testimony from interviews
essays journal entries
lesson plans notes performances
portfolios reflections reports test responses etc.
assignments handouts notes lectures/lecture outlines tests, quizzes evaluation rubrics etc.
college class sessions candidates’ field experience settings
communications/interactions
performances etc.
advising materials
contracts e-mails Handbooks organizational
charts meeting agendas meeting minutes meeting notes procedures
policy statements/ booklets
program descriptions and requirements
reports from other program reviews: local, regional, state, national
schedules student records etc.
administrators candidates faculty staff graduates/alums cooperating professionals others, as appropriate
On Standard◦ Review of the evidence indicates that the
overall standard is met◦ Usually requires a mix of types of evidence◦ Look at the whole, not the individual sub-
items within a standard◦ Consider the Institution’s understanding and
interpretation of the standard◦ Consult with co-chairs & team if uncertain
Not on Standard◦ Evidence of overall compliance w. standard
is not available
Commendations (OPTIONAL)◦ Only if something is exemplary and
goes well beyond the expectations of the standard
Recommendations◦ Required to explain Not on Standard
rating
◦ Institution will need to provide evidence that … (complete sentence w. language in standard)
Serves as the ‘abstract’ for your review of the program
Provides a brief explanation of program Provides narrative summary for final
program report to compliment data from matrix
Informs Council members to support their decision regarding approval
Note: this is not the place for personal congratulations or appreciation to the program; this is a formal report.
Summarize the program’s strengths If all standards were met, say so! Comment on sources and quality of
evidence Identify any areas of concern Summarize recommendations and
unmet standards (if any) Highlight commendations (if any) Keep it brief (< 1 page is fine)
Institutional Mission Core Values Governance structures Faculty style or personality Delivery models Activities not related to PEPP standards
Provide advice as to how to change the program
Compare their program to another program
Critique the readings, assignments, or syllabi
Make recommendations that aren't related to standards
Summary Findings for each program Matrix with documentation for each
standard and review process Program Recommendation Approval Options:
◦ Full Approval◦ Approval with Conditions◦ Not Approved◦ Provisional Approval ( new programs only)
Save Everything!Save Everything!
Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment & Resources matrices
Ed 609 and ED 610 matrices Summary Findings from each reviewer All matrices submitted to provide
documentation of each standard and the review process
Program Approval Recommendations
Submit electronic copy of matrix and summary findings to co-chairs before you leave.
Keep copies of documents Maintain confidentiality
Team report is shared with Institution for factual errors.
Council of TE reviews report. Institution attends Council meeting and responds to questions from reactors.
CTE makes a recommendation to the State Board of Education.