Newly created unified accrediting body will offer several options

High-quality teaching can only be delivered by high-quality teachers—professionals who are well prepared to meet the challenges of today’s classrooms and help all children achieve.

The International Reading Association (IRA) has always been a strong advocate for outstanding teacher education and works closely with the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE).

As a constituent member of NCATE, IRA is one of 33 specialized professional associations, or SPAs, whose specialized standards—such as our Standards for Reading Professionals—are required as part of the national accreditation process.

NCATE and the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC), a second accrediting body for U.S. educator preparation programs, recently announced plans to consolidate. IRA is an affiliate member of TEAC, but our involvement has been minimal because TEAC’s accreditation process doesn’t include SPAs.

A new organization has been created and is called the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, or CAEP. The consolidation into one organization with accreditation options will occur within the next two years.

The consolidation of NCATE and TEAC “establishes a strong, single voice that will speak to the standards for our profession,” notes Michael Shaw, professor of education at St. Thomas Aquinas College and IRA’s representative to NCATE. “It elevates teacher education to the status of the American Medical Association, American Bar Association, and other national accrediting agencies.”

Model system
CAEP’s goals include raising both the performance of candidates as practitioners in the nation’s schools and the standards for the evidence that supports claims of quality. In so doing, NCATE and TEAC leaders believe they will raise the stature of the entire profession.

During a two-year transition period, a joint design team will function as the interim CAEP board and create a model unified accreditation system that offers options and streamlined processes for institutions seeking national professional accreditation. The team has issued a report that provides a frame-work for how the accreditation process, with all of its complexities, will be developed under the new organization.

NCATE President James G. Cibulka will become CAEP’s president and CEO, and TEAC President Frank B. Murray will chair the board. “We have not approached our task as merely unifying NCATE and TEAC with the least possible change to two accrediting systems that are already quite similar,” they emphasize. “Rather, we have set a much more ambitious goal: to create a model unified accreditation system.”

Implications for IRA
Cibulka has made a commitment that he and the representatives of the specialized professional associations who are NCATE members will participate in the planning and design of the model unified accreditation process to ensure that the application options for accreditation maintain the highest level of rigor in evaluating programs respective to their specialties.

Currently, there are three options that the design team has presented which relate to SPA standards:

Option One continues the SPA national recognition process IRA currently uses with NCATE; Option Two calls for institutions to complete a single program report that demonstrates how specialty programs meet SPA or state standards; and Option Three is state review of programs, which occurs now in just under half of the states in the NCATE system. In that system, states align their program standards with the SPA standards.

Option Two a concern
Of greatest concern to IRA and the other SPAs is Option Two, which in the current report might allow decisions about specialized programs such as reading specialist/literacy coach preparation to be made by evaluation teams that don’t include a representative from the specialized field and thus might lack the content knowledge and expertise to make an informed decision.

Under that option, programs would be required to provide assessments and data which demonstrate that programs are aligned with the SPA or state standards. However, a program could not achieve national recognition unless its programs are submitted under the first option.

IRA has taken a leadership role in asking for a strong voice in the development of Option Two to ensure that we have input regarding the evaluation of graduate reading/literacy programs.

In addition to Shaw, other IRA representatives who will be involved in this process include IRA’s Professional Standards and Ethics Committee co-chairs Debra Miller, professor in the Education Program at McDaniel College, and Diane Kern, assistant professor in the School of Education at the University of Rhode Island; and Gail Keating, projects manager of IRA’s Research and Professional Development Office.

Current system still valid
Cibulka urges institutions that would like to pursue national accreditation to proceed under the current NCATE system rather than wait until the new CAEP process begins. “The worst possible reaction would be to say, ‘Well, things are changing so let’s do nothing,’” he said. “It is the intent of the interim CAEP board that institutions feel supported and ahead of the information curve.”

During the transition, Reading Today will provide updates on the CAEP accreditation processes as they affect IRA.

In the meantime, to learn more about accreditation, governance, and other related information about CAEP, visit the new website at www.caepsite.org, as well as www.ncate.org and www.teac.org. Also visit www.reading.org/Resources/ProfessionalDevelopment/Accreditation.aspx.

NCATE, TEAC plan to consolidate (December 2010/January 2011). Reading Today, 28(3), 10.