Commission on Teacher Credentialing Preliminary Report of Findings and Addendum
Institution CSU Fresno Program PRELIMINARY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Date of Review 11/2020
Please complete the table below for all programs that were deemed to require “more information needed” by reviewers during Program Review (PR). Brief narrative (less than 150 words) is allowable but response must include links to evidence that address the issue identified by the reviewers.
Posting the Addendum
Information from the addendum must be posted on the institution’s accreditation website
at least 60 days before the site visit, along with the original program review document
and feedback from the program reviewers. Please do not resubmit your response the
items below; responses need only be added to your institution’s accreditation website.
Standards Found to be Preliminarily Aligned
1, 3, 6, and 9
Standards Requiring More Information
| Standard | Comment from Program Reviewers | Response from Program |
|---|---|---|
| Standard 1: Program Design and Rationale | Clear Rational and design of program. Evidence with organizational chart and connections
to CalAPA. Along with multiple pathways to acquire PAC (Intern program). There does not seem to be an explicit connection to “adult learning theory” or “theory and research” which could be strengthened either in the program design portion, the program handbook, or both. |
|
| Standard 2: Collaboration, Communication, and Coordination | The field experience partnership document, where I would expect to see this information,
hyperlinks to the spring 2020 cohort list (seems to be a hyperlink error) and only
contains total numbers of students placed in each district. It would be helpful if there were a document to explain the nature of the partnership and how the “partnerships contribute substantively to the design, implementation, quality and effectiveness of the program.” There is an MOU, but it would be helpful if the MOU specified more clearly the roles and expectations of all partners within the MOU (currently the responsibilities are listed only in the field instructor training section of the submitted evidence). Finally, there is no information about how partners are engaged in the ongoing work of “open and ongoing communication about program quality...” How are site fieldwork mentors trained? |
|
| Standard 3: Development of Professional Leadership Perspectives | From a holistic review of all syllabi there is evidence that this standard is met. However, the links in the matrix are not working correctly and often send us to alternative pages before allowing us to enter the course pages. Also, some links continually revert to the same pager over and over again. It would be helpful to highlight in each course (or other documents) exactly where this standard sits and provide a link to the highlighted area. It would make it easier to point to evidence of standard. | |
| Standard 4: Equity, Diversity, and Access | Reviewers did not see any evidence of this standard. | |
| Standard 5: Role of Schooling in a Democratic Society | Evidence of this portion of Standard 5 was missing. Focus on providing more specific evidence of this standard. “The program prepares each candidate to understand the role of the school in preparing K-12 students to actively and productively engage in civic responsibility and to identify and critically analyze the variety of ideas and forces in society that contribute to (or constrain) a democratic society. The program includes opportunities for candidates to learn how historical and philosophical influences, state and federal policy decisions, and prevailing educational practices impact schooling.” | |
| Standard 6: Preparing Candidates to Master the Administrator Performance Expectations (CAPEs) | There is evidenced of the standard being meet in a holistic sense. The Matrix and a review of all syllabi and the handbook seem to indicate that all CAPEs are covered and have included the CalAPA in some fieldwork courses; however, it was difficult to gauge the increasing complexity due to the hyperlinks in the Matrix not working (and clicking in the I,P, A just took us to the top of each syllabus rather than a specific, highlighted portion) | |
| Standard 7: Nature of Field Experiences | It is unclear from the evidence presented how this portion of Standard 7 is met: “Field experiences include a variety of diverse and realistic settings both in the day-to-day functions of administrators and in long-term policy design and implementation.” | |
| Standard 8: Guidance, Assistance, and Feedback | Reviewers found no Evidence of Standard | |
| 8A: Administration of the Administrator Performance Assessment (APA) | Reviewers found no Evidence of Standard | |
| 8B: Candidate Preparation and Support | There is evidence of some CalAPA assessment materials contained within some of the
fieldwork course syllabi; however, it is not clear how/if students are provided with
the assessment guides or other forms of required CalAPA supports listed in Standard
8B. There is no mention of a remediation plan related to the CalAPA. |
|
| 8C: Assessor Qualifications, Training, and Scoring Reliability | Reviewers found no Evidence of Standard | |
| Standard 9: Assessment of Candidate Performance | Standard 9 appears to be met through a combination of the syllabi and other evidence provided about the candidate monitoring and recommendation process. |
This PDF is provided as a print-only reference document and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. For more information, please visit Title II Rule on Digital Accessibility page.