Unless the terms of the state partnership dictate otherwise, the accreditation process requires preparation of program reports for all professional education programs for which NCATE has approved program standards. As of 2007, NCATE had program standards in the following 21 areas:

• Computer education
• Early childhood education
• Education technology specialist
• Elementary education
• English/language arts education
• Environmental education
• Foreign language education
• Gifted education
• Health education
• Mathematics education
• Middle level education
• Physical Education
• Reading specialists and supervisors
• School administrators
• School library media specialists
• School psychologists
• Science education
• Social studies education
• Special education
• Teaching English to speakers of other languages
• Technology education

Special Cases:The following applies to programs that may have difficulty providing appropriate data for the program review.

Dormant Programs: If no candidates are in the pipeline and no one has graduated from the program in the past three years, a program report is not required. When the dormant program is reactivated by admitting candidates, a program report may be voluntarily submitted at that time.

Reactivated Programs: If a dormant program is reactivated by admitting candidates, the program may voluntarily submit a program report at that point. However, the unit must submit a program report for a reactivated program as part of its scheduled program review cycle whether or not candidates have graduated from the program.

New Programs: A unit can voluntarily submit a program report for a new program anytime between on-site visits if the program has been approved by the state. It must submit a program report for the new program as part of its scheduled program review cycle whether or not candidates have graduated from the program.

Redesigned Programs: If a program is undergoing a major program redesign, it may request a delay of its submission of the program report. The delay request must be submitted to NCATE with a detailed explanation of the redesign and its timeline. A delay will be granted if the redesign requires major changes in the program and if the appropriate state agency agrees to the delay.

Small Programs: In Spring 2010 and Fall 2010, NCATE will defer review of low-enrollment programs, defined as programs with ≤ 5 completers in the last three years (in total). During this year, NCATE staff will work with states, institutions, and SPAs to develop a new strategy for review of these programs that will provide quality assurance but may not lead to SPA recognition. If you have further questions, please contact Margie Crutchfield (margie@ncate.org) or Robin Marion (robin@ncate.org).

Programs accredited by other accrediting organizations: NCATE recognizes the following specialized accrediting organizations and, therefore, does not review programs in these areas:

• American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)
• American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AACS)
• American Library Association ( ALA)
• American Psychological Association (APA)
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)
• Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP)
• National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD)
• National Association of Schools of Dance (NASD)
• National Association of Schools of Music (NASM)
• National Association of Schools of Theatre (NAST)

Programs accredited by one of these organizations are not required to be submitted to NCATE for program review. Please see the NCATE Handbook for Accreditation Visits for information on NCATE requirements for these programs for the unit review.

Other Cases:

Initial Licensure/Post Baccalaureate Programs: Many secondary post-baccalaureate programs have been developed for candidates who enter the program already having been prepared in the content area; typically candidates enter the program with an undergraduate major in the field. Many of these are MAT programs although in a few institutions these are called MEd programs. Most post-baccalaureate and alternate pathways programs are also designed to prepare candidates who come into the program with appropriate content area preparation. For the purpose of this discussion, these will all be called “Initial Licensure/Post Baccalaureate (IL/PB)” programs. NCATE recently approved a new process for approving these kinds of program, but only those in the secondary content areas: English, math, science, social studies and foreign language. This new process does not include programs in special education, elementary education or other areas. IL/PD programs will be able to combine programs into one secondary education program and submit one report. This report will address a generic set of standards but will include two discipline specific components: an evaluation of discipline-specific content knowledge components (through a transcript analysis) and an evaluation of discipline specific content pedagogy components (in the pedagogical assessments). For full information about this new process, see the document on the NCATE web site on the Program Review Resources page, or contact Margie Crutchfield (margie@ncate.org) or Robin Marion (robin@ncate.org).

Middle Level Programs: Middle level programs that prepare candidates in two or more content areas and that meet the NMSA criteria for middle-level programs will submit program reports to NCATE/NMSA. NMSA reviewers will evaluate the submission and make a decision on whether or not the program will be nationally recognized by NMSA. In addition, NMSA reviewers will ensure that the 80% of completers pass the appropriate content test(s). National recognition of this program by NMSA will also be dependent upon the unit having nationally recognized programs in each of the appropriate content areas at the secondary level. NCATE staff will verify the status of the secondary content program areas. Middle level programs could be recognized with conditions by NMSA if secondary content area programs are still in process. For those few middle level programs that do not have secondary preparation programs, 80% of the candidates will still be required to pass the state test in the content area and the state must ensure the adequacy of the content preparation.

In 2009, the Specialty Areas Studies Board (SASB) approved the following options for program review as a response to concerns about the Program Review process. The current process (now called Option A) will continue with some changes to the required documentation. All options are available beginning for programs submitting program reports in Spring 2010.

For programs submitting program reports for the first time:

Option A: The current process will continue to be an option. This option requires that the program select 6 to 8 key assessments required of all candidates. NCATE has proscribed the type of assessments for #1 Đ 5. The following changes have been made to the program report form:

1. In Section I, questions 4 and 5 for all SPAs have been deleted.
2. In Section I, question 3 has been deleted for all SPAs except CEC, NCTE, and NASP.
3. In Section IV, instructions have been clarified and shortened.

Option B: This option provides institutions greater flexibility to choose their own assessments (up to a maximum of 8) and take responsibility to demonstrate the collection demonstrates candidate mastery of the SPA standards. Faculty can select the key assessments (required of all candidates) with the following constraints:

1. Faculty can select up to 8 assessments (there is no lower limit on the number of assessments)
2. One assessment must be the state licensure test if there is a state licensure test in the discipline area
3. One assessment must focus on candidate impact on student learning, or, for non-teaching programs, an assessment of candidate impact on providing a supportive learning environment.
4. Assessments, taken as a whole, must demonstrate mastery of SPA standards.
5. Assessments must address the following key elements of NCATE Unit Standard 1: content, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, and impact on student learning.

For programs submitting program reports for continuing recognition:

Option C: Continuing Recognition: This option is available to programs that, during their previous review cycle, were recognized using the 6 to 8 key assessment model. This model was first available for programs submitted in Fall 2004 and required for all programs submitted in Spring 2005 and thereafter. If programs meet these criteria, the documentation required for the current review could be significantly reduced as follows:

1. Programs must submit data on all assessments.
2. Programs submit documentation only for those assessments that are new or substantially changed since the previous submission
3. Programs respond only to those items in Section I for which there has been substantial change since the pervious submission.
4. There is a greater focus on Section V focusing on how programs have used data to improve their program.

Option D: Validity and Reliability Studies Option

This option permits an institution to conduct validity and reliability studies of its assessments in lieu of other program report evidence requirements. The validity and reliability of assessments (content in relation to standards, consistency with other evidence, success in subsequent employment, etc.) is so integral to a standards and performance-based national recognition review that systematic examination of validity is essential. It would, by definition, directly address SPA standards. It would permit institutions with appropriately prepared faculty to formulate a task as part of accreditation that is meaningful for them, while, not unimportantly, helping to advance the research base for educator preparation. It is an option that might lend itself to joint participation across several institutions, or at least across programs within an institution. It is probably not an option that every institution has the capacity to execute; moreover, it would require a different kind of selection and/or training of reviewers. Before a program could choose this option, it must receive approval from NCATE.

For more information contact Margie Crutchfield (margie@ncate.org).

State Licensure Test Data:

NCATE policy requires a program to have an 80 percent pass rate on the state licensure exam in the content area in order to qualify for program recognition. The data must be derived from the most recent annual reporting period, as reflected by a state or testing agency report, or the institution’s own records (which would provide the opportunity to present a more current set of data). This requirement is waived for programs that (1) do not have a required state licensure test, (2) have not been in existence long enough to have produced data from one year of completers, and/or (3) have not produced a total of 10 completers in the last three years.

A program report that does not reflect an 80 percent pass rate under Assessment #1 on licensure tests cannot receive or retain national recognition; however, the program could be nationally recognized with conditions and would then be required to submit new test data within 18 months.

Assessment Data:

For full recognition, programs will be required to submit data that represent two applications of the assessment. That is, the assessment must be given and data collected at least two times. If an assessment is in a class that is offered every semester, then the two applications could be satisfied in one academic year. If the assessment is in a class that is offered once per year, then the two applications would take two academic years. For revised and response to conditions reports, data from one application of the assessment would be required for full recognition.

NOTE: For units undergoing accreditation for the first time, programs are expected to be able to include in their program reports at least one year of data on all assessments in order to be eligible for full national recognition.

Over time, it is quite probable that faculty may decide to change, adapt, or create new assessments based on their experiences and candidate performance. In these cases, they may not have the required years of data available for that assessment when they need to submit their next report. As a rule of thumb, it’s better to submit a newly developed assessment that meets the expectations of the program report than it is to submit a less compelling assessment for which you have several years of data. (Note: assessments still in the “planning stage” are not likely to carry much weight.) However, the reviewers will expect, at a minimum, to see at least one semester of disaggregated data for each assessment.

Program Submission Due Dates:

It is required that program reports be submitted in the semester one year prior to the unit site visit. NCATE will accept program reports submitted up to two years prior to the site visit.

Initial reports submitted in Fall Semester

Program report due to NCATE September 15

Recognition report due back to program February 1

Initial reports submitted in Spring Semester

Program report due to NCATE March 15

Recognition report due back to program August 1

Revised Reports (formerly called rejoinders)

For a recognition report received by August 1, a revised report can be submitted by the following September 15, with a response due back to the program by the following February 1.

If the recognition report is received by February 1, a revised report can be submitted by the following March 15, with a response due back to the program by the following August 1. If the revised report is not submitted by the following March 15, then any later revised reports must be submitted on the regular timeline of either September 15 or March 15.

Response to Conditions or Supplemental Reports

Follow the same time line for both initial and revised report submissions (above)

Number of Program Reports to be Submitted (for multiple programs in same discipline):

If there are differences among program tracks in their assessment structure, assessment content, and/or conceptual model, then it might be less confusing—for both the report preparer and the report reviewers—to submit two separate program reports (for example, one report for the baccalaureate program, and one for the post-baccalaureate). In general, if the compiler is unsure whether or not to combine two program areas into one report, it is best to submit two reports. If you are not sure whether to prepare a single report or separate ones, please call the Program Review staff at NCATE for advice.

The following procedures apply to programs in the same discipline (English, Elementary, etc.) that are at different levels (for example, undergraduate and post-baccalaureate) or different in other ways—but that have identical assessments. If the assessments are not identical then individual program reports must be submitted for each program.

In order to ensure that each program receives an individual decision, it is necessary for a shell (or template) to be created for each program in PRS. However, the following procedure will allow you to enter all of the information and text for these programs just one time. The system will then automatically copy the information into the other program report forms.

This is how it works:

1. First, you must notify NCATE which programs have identical assessments, rubrics and/or scoring guides. We will then ‘link’ these reports in PRS. For example, you notify NCATE that you have two Elementary programs: one is an undergraduate program and one is an MAT program, and they have identical assessments. This link must be made before any text is entered into the program report form.
   
   
2. NCATE will link these reports in PRS. You can tell that they are linked in PRS because the first boxes in the left column in PRS for those two programs will be shaded the same color.
   
   
3. The compiler of the report completes all the fields in the program report, adds attachments, etc. All the data charts should include data, disaggregated for each program being submitted. In the example above, that means that each data chart for each assessment would have two columns, one column for the data from the undergraduate program, and one column with data for the MAT program.
   
   
4. The compiler submits the report. The compiler sees a “thank you for submitting” note from NCATE when the report is submitted. In addition, the NCATE Coordinator at that campus also receives notification that the program report has been submitted.
   
   
5. After the first report is submitted, the compiler clicks on the program name in the second shell. The compiler is asked if they want to copy the information from the first report into the second shell. After the compiler clicks “ok,” PRS automatically copies all text, information and attachments into each report linked to the first one.
   
   
6. The compiler should go into the second report and change any necessary information (for example, in the example give above, the compiler would change the “Degree Level” from Undergraduate to Masters).
   
   
7. The compiler then submits the second report.
   
   
8. The above process can be repeated if there are three reports that have been linked. After the compiler submits the first report, they can then click on the program name in the third shell and gives the “ok,” all the information and attachments in the submitted program will be filled into all the program reports shells that are linked to it.

Prior to the submission deadline, programs must submit a chart that lists the programs it plans to submit whether they are linked or not. The chart can be found by clicking on the link below: (http://www.ncate.org/institutions/ChartPRS09.asp?ch=90 ). Every program report that is to be submitted should be listed on that chart. If programs are submitting linked program reports, the NCATE coordinator must identify those reports to be linked in a different chart. Both charts should be emailed to ncateprograms@ncate.org so that the shells can be created. If you are unsure as to what a “linked program report” is, please see Question 1 of the FAQ document found on the Resources page under Program Review.

Report Submission Process:

The program report will be submitted completely on-line. Assessments for Section IV as well as certain other documents must be prepared in a standardized word processing format (Word, Word Perfect, PDF or Excel) and submitted as attachments. The compiler will be able to save the program report as a draft and return to the web-based form later to complete. Once files are attached they cannot be edited. When the report has been completed, the compiler (unless the institution has designated another person) will mark it as finished and submit it for review.

The Unit Head and NCATE Coordinator at the institution will receive an email with the appropriate URL and access information. He or she can provide that information to individual compilers.  Once a compiler has received the user id and password, they can access the report by pointing their Internet browser to the designated URL.  A log-in screen will appear. When a compiler has successfully logged in to AIMS and then goes to PRS, he or she will see a list of the all the programs to be submitted by the unit.

Specific instructions for creating and inputting the different sections of the report are available on this web page, in a document titled “How to Prepare Program Reports for Submission in [submission date].”

Report Review Process:

Each program report will be assigned to a team of two to three reviewers who have been trained in the standards by their specialized professional association (SPA), and who have been screened for conflicts of interest with the reporting institution. All reviews will be completed and all recognition reports will be submitted on-line. A lead reviewer will compile a team report, including a recognition decision representing the consensus of the team. The reports are reviewed by an audit committee of the professional association, which determines national recognition.

Program reports will be evaluated on how well assessments and data derived from assessments provide evidence that candidates meet the SPA standards. National recognition decisions, therefore, will be based on the success of program candidates as measured on credible assessments (see section entitled “Guidelines on Assessment”).

For very small programs, data derived from assessments are not, by themselves, a reliable indicator of program quality. However, if candidates perform poorly on assessments, it will be important for the report compiler to reflect on why that poor performance occurred and how or whether the program should be changed as a consequence. Whether or not the program is large or small, candidates are still expected to meet program standards.

Character Limits: Character limits are specified for each of the narrative responses required in Sections I and V of the report, with each part of Section I having a 4000 character limit (including spaces), except for Section I, Question 2, which has an 8000 character limit. Sections II and III are charts, which the institution will fill out or check off and Section IV will have attachments for each of the 6-8 assessments. Section V has a character limit of 12000.

Attachments: Only the items specified in Section I and IV of the report form may be attached to the report. Institutions will not be able to attach or submit any extraneous documentation with the report (e.g. handbooks, syllabi). Candidate work samples or artifacts will no longer be requested or accepted as part of the program review document but will be relevant in the on-site unit review. Documentation external to the institution (e.g. a report from the testing agency) will need to be scanned by the institution in order to be submitted as an attachment. There will be a limit of no more than 20 attachments total for each program report.

NOTE: Charts and graphs cannot be input into the narrative fields or text boxes in the program report template. However, charts and graphs can be uploaded as attachments in two different places: within Section IV as part of your 6-8 key assessments or in Section I, Questions 3 and 4 (mostly).

Program of Study

A program of study that outlines the courses and experiences is required for candidates to complete the program. The program of study must include course titles. (This information may be provided as an attachment from the college catalog or as a student advisement sheet.)

Candidate Data Chart—Section I

Data is requested on the number of candidates enrolled and the number of program completers from the 3 previous academic years and can now be filled out in a chart as part of Section I. At some institutions candidates are considered “enrolled” in the program if they list the program as a major or are taking courses in the program. It is not until they are formally admitted into the program that they could be considered actively involved in the program. It is this last group that should be reported in NCATE program report.

The purpose of this chart is to provide reviewers the information they need to ensure that program faculty have appropriate expertise in the program discipline. This information is input into a chart as part of Section I. As with the other parts of Section I, there are character limits for each section of the faculty chart. The only faculty listed here should be faculty responsible for professional coursework, clinical supervision and those who teach methods courses. Adjunct and part-time faculty should be listed only if they have taught or provided other services for the program during the most recent academic year. It is not necessary to provide the names of every faculty member who teaches any courses taken by candidates in the program. A faculty member might choose to list three scholarly publications as her major contributions. However, if all faculty list scholarship as their contribution, the program report preparer may want to ask some faculty to highlight leadership or service experiences instead, in order to demonstrate that overall program faculty are contributing in all three areas.

An assessment is an evaluated activity or requirement by which a program determines that specific outcomes or standards have been mastered by a candidate. A program is limited to no more than 8 “key” assessments. It must be required that all candidates have taken these assessments. Due to the limitation on the number of assessments, it is expected that these key assessments would be comprehensive and each would most likely address multiple SPA standards.

A single key assessment could include several components, or ‘sub-assessments.’ For example, an assessment of candidate impact on student learning could include a pre-test, unit plan, implementation of unit plan, post-test and reflection. Each of these components may be evaluated and scored individually, with a final score computed from the sub-scores. The elementary education program report, in another example, requires assessments in the areas of mathematics, English, science and social studies for its assessments on content and on lesson planning. In most cases, it would be necessary to combine several individual assessments for each of these final key assessments.

It is also possible that a major comprehensive assessment like a portfolio may include several in-depth assessments including evaluations of content knowledge, lesson planning, and student teaching. In this case, it would be appropriate to use the different components of the portfolio as separate assessments.

The submission of any assessment will require the two page narrative and include the three pieces expected as part of each overall assessment in Section IV:  (1) the assessment instrument or a complete description of the assessment, (2) the scoring guide (e.g., rubrics, checklist, etc.) for the assessment, and (3) aggregated data derived from the assessment.  All four of these documents must be combined into one document.

Required Forms of Assessment:   All programs for Option A are required to include assessments of the following five types.  Some SPAs have additional or unique requirements for assessments. Any unique requirements are included in Section IV of the SPA program report template and described in the “Specific Instructions” section of the program report form.

Assessment #1: State Licensure Test (all Options):

Compilers are expected to delineate the relationship of the content (or test specifications) of the state test and the SPA standards.

Licensure test data must reflect the percentage of candidates who have passed the state licensure test for each year over the past three academic years, including the most recent year. The most recent year of data should include the total scores and, if possible, sub-scores on the licensure test. NCATE and ETS have jointly prepared a document that provides information on how to obtain sub-score information for PRAXIS II tests. This document can be found in “Program Resources” on the Institutions page of the NCATE website at the following URL: http://www.ncate.org/institutions/PraxisIIDataStd1.asp?ch=90. Data must be presented for all program completers, even if there were fewer than 10 test takers in a given year.  A Title II, state, or test agency report may be submitted as a scanned attachment, as long as those reports present data as specified above.

If the program’s state does not require licensure tests or professional examinations in the content area, data from another assessment must be presented to document candidate attainment of content knowledge.

Assessment #2: Content Assessment (Option A only)

The program is required to have a second assessment that is primarily focused on the content of the SPA standards. Examples of possible SPA-specific assessments have been included in Section IV of the SPA program report template.

Assessment # 3: Assessment of Candidate Ability to Plan Instruction (Option A only)

The program is required to provide an assessment instrument that demonstrates a candidate’s ability to plan as appropriate to his/her discipline. For most initial teacher preparation programs, the most typical example is a unit of instruction, although other types of assessments are acceptable. For other school professionals, this assessment should be one appropriate to the discipline.

Assessment #4: Clinical Practice Assessment (Option A only)

Generic student teaching/internship evaluations (those used by all programs in a unit) will not necessarily provide direct evidence of meeting specific SPA standards. Faculty have several options to ensure that these kinds of unit-wide assessments are appropriate for SPA review. For example, program faculty could develop an addition to a generic student teaching/internship evaluation that does evaluate the candidate on appropriate SPA standards. Faculty could also code elements in the unit-wide assessment with the specific SPA standards that are addressed by the item and, in the narritive in Section IV for this assessment, provide a rationale for how these items are evaluated in practice to ensure that SPA standards are addressed. A third option is to use a SPA specific assessment completed during a pre-student teaching practicum.

It is important to remember NCATE’s guidance on effective field and clinical experiences:

Field experiences facilitate candidates’ development as professional educators by providing opportunities for candidates to observe in schools and other agencies, tutor students, participate in education-related community events, interact with families of students, attend school board meetings, and assist teachers or other school professionals prior to clinical practice. Both field experiences and clinical practice reflect the unit’s conceptual framework and help candidates continue to develop the content, professional and pedagogical knowledge, skills and dispositions delineated in standards. Clinical practice allows candidates to use information technology to support teaching and learning. Clinical practice is sufficiently extensive and intensive for candidates to develop and demonstrate proficiencies in the professional roles for which they are preparing.  ( Standard 3, NCATE Professional Standards 2008 Edition)

Assessment #5: Candidate Impact on Student Learning or on Providing a Supportive Environment for Student Learning (all Options)

NCATE published a paper on the essential components of an assessment that addresses candidate impact on student learning and has provided several examples. This paper (summarized in Quality Teaching, Fall 2004, available on the NCATE web site) outlines four elements that could be included in such an assessment. The essential feature of this evidence is a cluster of activities or performances in which the candidate:

• Undertakes a diagnosis (a pre-test) or P-12 student learning in some area he or she will teach;

• Plans an appropriate sequence of instruction to advance P-12 student learning, and teaches in ways that engage P-12 students who bring differing background knowledge and learning needs;

• Conducts some concluding assessment (or post-test); documents that student learning has occurred, or has not; and

• Reflects on changes in teaching that might have improved the results.

Assessments #6, 7, and 8 (Option A only):

The program is required to submit six assessments, but in most cases, the form of that sixth assessment is determined by program faculty. However, certain SPAs do choose to name a 6th required type of assessment, so please check individual SPAs’ directions for guidance. The strategy for choosing which additional assessments to submit could be based on several factors. For example, it could be that a program’s content-based assessments are relatively weak (Assessments #1 and #2), and the faculty might decide they need another assessment to adequately demonstrate candidate mastery of the content of the SPA standards. Or faculty may find that the assessments they have chosen do not fully address one or more of the SPA standards. In that case, faculty should adapt current assessments or create new assessments that do address the missing SPA standards. While Assessments #7 and #8 are not required, programs can submit any assessment that they feel may strengthen the coverage of the standards.

For the Review of a Program that had never gone through the national review process, the reviewers have one of three decisions they can make.

A.  Decision Choices for a Program not Previously Recognized:

Those programs that are going through review for the first time will have several opportunities to submit reports before a final recognition decision is applied. This will allow new programs the opportunity to receive feedback and make changes in their programs without being penalized with a “not recognized” decision. It will also allow the program review process to be more collaborative between the SPAs and the program faculty. The following decision choices would also apply to programs at continuing institutions that may have been recognized in the past but are not currently recognized one year prior to the site visit. A program that is being evaluated for the first time will receive one of the following three results:

1.      National Recognition contingent upon unit accreditation

• The program substantially meets standards.
• No further submission required; program will receive full national recognition when the unit receives accreditation.
• Program will be listed on the NCATE web site as Nationally Recognized if the unit is already accredited. If the unit is not accredited the program will be listed as Nationally Recognized pending unit accreditation.

2.      National Recognition with Conditions contingent upon unit accreditation

• The program generally meets standards; however a “Response to Conditions” report must be submitted within 18 months to remove the conditions. Conditions could include one or more of the following:
  • Insufficient data to determine if standards are met.
  • Insufficient alignment among standards or scoring assessments or scoring guides.
  • Lack of quality in some assessments or scoring guides
  • An insufficient number of SPA standards was met.
  • The NCATE requirement for an 80% pass rate on state licensure tests is not met.
• The program has two opportunities within 18-months after the decision to remove the conditions. If the program is unsuccessful after two attempts, the program status will be changed to Not Nationally Recognized.
• The program is listed on the NCATE website as Nationally Recognized until it achieves National Recognition or its status is changed to Not Nationally Recognized, in which case the program will be removed from the list on the website.

3.      Further Development Required:

• The standards that are not met are critical to a quality program and more than a few in number OR are few in number but so fundamentally important that recognition is not appropriate.
• The program will have two opportunities within the 12 to 14 months after the first decision to attain National Recognition or N ational Recognition with Conditions. If the program is unsuccessful after two attempts, the program status will be changed to Not Nationally Recognized

A program could receive a decision of Not Nationally Recognized only after two submissions within the 12 to 14 month period (from the first decision) were unsuccessful in achieving  National Recognition or National Recognition with Conditions. 

B. Proposal for Review of a Program that is Currently Recognized:

Program reports that were approved by a SPA during the previous review cycle will not be in jeopardy of losing their recognition status immediately after their first review in a cycle. These programs will receive one of the following three decisions:

1.      Continued National Recognition

• The program substantially meets standards.
• No further submission required.
• Program is listed on the NCATE web site as Nationally Recognized.

2.      Continued National Recognition with Conditions

• The program generally meets standards; however, a “Response to Conditions” report must be submitted within 18 months to remove the conditions. Conditions could include one or more of the following:
  • Insufficient data to determine if standards are met
  • Insufficient alignment among standards or scoring assessments or scoring guides
  • Lack of quality in some assessments or scoring guides
  • An insufficient number of SPA standards was met.
  • The NCATE requirement for an 80% pass rate on state licensure tests is not met
• The program will have two opportunities within the 18 months after the first decision to attain National Recognition. If the program is unsuccessful after two attempts, the program status will be changed to Not Nationally Recognized
• The program is listed on the NCATE website as Nationally Recognized (based on its prior review) until the UAB makes an accreditation decision for the unit. At that point, if the program is still Nationally Recognized with Conditions the designation on the website will be changed to National Recognition with Conditions. This designation will stand until the program achieves National Recognition or its status is changed to Not Nationally Recognized, in which case the program will be removed from the list on the website.

3.      Continued National Recognition with Probation

• The standards that are not met are critical to a quality program and more than a few in number OR are few in number but so fundamentally important that recognition is not appropriate. To remove probation, the unit may submit a revised program report addressing unmet standards within 12 to 14 months, or the unit may submit a new program report for national recognition within 12 to 14 months.
• The program will have two opportunities within the 12 to 14 months after the first decision to attain National Recognition or National Recognition with Conditions. If the program is unsuccessful after two attempts, the program status will be changed to Not Nationally Recognized .
• The program is listed on the NCATE web site as Nationally Recognized (based on its prior review) until the end of the semester in which the UAB makes an accreditation decision for the Unit. At that point, the decision will be changed to Not Nationally Recognized and the program will be removed from the website.

A program could receive a decision of Not Nationally Recognized only after two submissions within the 12 to 14 month period (from the first decision) were unsuccessful in reaching either National Recognition or Continued National Recognition with Conditions.