Commission on Teacher Credentialing Common Standards Preliminary Report of Findings

Institution	CSU Fresno
Date of Review	April 30th 2021

Please prepare an addendum that addresses those areas below that were deemed to require more information by reviewers during the Common Standards review and where specific evidence is requested for the site visit. Brief narrative (less than 75 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 Common Standards 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 in preparation for the 2018-19 Site Visit.

Standards Found to be Preliminarily Aligned	1, 2

Standards Requiring More Information	More Information Needed: Part(s) of the standards for which more information is needed	Additional Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit
Standard 3: Course of Study, Fieldwork, and Clinical Practice.	Reviewers found inconsistent evidence of how: a) Site-based supervisors must be certified and experienced in teaching the specified content or performing the services authorized by the credential b) How the process and criteria result in the selection of site-based supervisors who provide effective and knowledgeable support for candidates. c) Site-based supervisors are trained in supervision, oriented to the supervisory role, evaluated and recognized in a systematic manner. Reviewers need additional evidence of the following element of Common Standard 3: Through site-based work and clinical experiences, programs offered by the unit provide candidates with opportunities to both experience issues of diversity that affect school climate and to effectively implement research-based strategies for improving teaching and student learning as it relates to the Preliminary Multiple Subject/ Single Subject program as it was unclear aside from the narrative of program design. Reviewers need evidence of how, for the RLAA/RLLS program, candidates have significant experience in California public schools with diverse student populations and the opportunity to work with the range of students identified in the program standards.	This information (a, b, and c in the column to the left) is needed for the following programs specifically: PASC RLAA/RLLS DHH ECSE PPS: SC PPS: SP School Nurse (only missing “recognition of supervisors” in c) BILA: ELA
Standard 4: Continuous Improvement	Reviewers need more information on how the education unit and its programs regularly assess their effectiveness in the area of support services for candidates. For example, how are counseling and advising services evaluated?	What does the institution identify as support services and how are they assessed?
Standard 5: Program Impact	Reviewers need additional information on the how the unit and its Preliminary Multiple Subject/ Single Subject program evaluate and demonstrate that they are having a positive impact on candidate learning and competence and on teaching and learning in schools that serve California’s students.	For example, the narrative reflects the quantified data of the candidates but is there additional community/ stakeholder feedback?

Download the PDF

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.