TEAC’s
standard of quality: The quality of the case
A program meets the TEAC standard of quality when the evidence cited
in the program’s self-study document, the Inquiry Brief
or Inquiry Brief Proposal, is consistent with the claims
made about student learning and when there is little or no credible
evidence that is inconsistent with the claims. TEAC uses a system
of heuristics to arrive at its accreditation decision and judgment
about whether the program’s evidence of student learning and
other matters is trustworthy and sufficient.
To establish that a program meets TEAC’s
principles and standards, TEAC first determines whether or not the
cited evidence of student learning is accurate and trustworthy.
This is accomplished through the academic audit. TEAC’s Accreditation
Panel and Accreditation Committee then determine whether or not
the evidence is sufficient to support the program faculty’s
claims for student learning.
The quality of evidence and the quality of the
system that produced it are the two key factors in the TEAC accreditation
decision. (Return to summary outline.)
TEAC’s
philosophy of accreditation
Four principles guide TEAC’s accreditation
process:
1. Improvement is a continuous process in which
each step helps define the next one and moves it forward.
2. The accreditation process must be inquiry driven,
starting from the faculty’s questions about the program’s
mission and results.
3. The accreditation process includes evidence
from academic audits that examine the trustworthiness of the evidence
that student learning meets high expectations and that the program
follows processes that produce quality.
4. The process is intended to be frugal, not burdening
the program and institution with unnecessary activities or costs
in paperwork, personnel, time, and money.
Throughout all stages of the accreditation process,
TEAC and program faculty maintain open and frequent communication
on all relevant matters.
Process principle one: continuous improvement
to advance quality. The three TEAC quality principles--student
learning, assessment of student learning, and institutional learning--constitute
a dynamic cycle in which the program formulates goals for student
achievement, allocates needed resources, assesses student performance,
and uses the evidence from the assessment to improve program quality.
TEAC’s quality principles are complemented
with an accreditation process that incorporates practices of continuous
improvement. TEAC's approach to accreditation relies on the following
ideas from the continuous improvement literature:
- Create constancy of purpose for improvement
- Balance constancy of purpose and continual improvement, short-
and long-term results, and knowledge and action
- Link program improvement to student learning
- Improve every system in the program to enhance the quality
of teaching, learning, research, service activities, and outcomes
- Eliminate misleading and superficial numerical quotas and
indicators
TEAC does not assume a single model or template
for education programs. Rather, TEAC’s approach reflects an
understanding that continuous improvement is a process that leads
to many different paths to excellence in professional teacher education.
Process principle two: inquiry-driven accreditation.
Institutions of higher education justifiably take pride in their
record of thoughtful and scholarly approaches to their work. TEAC
believes that accreditation of professional teacher education programs
should be grounded in exactly the same kind of scholarly inquiry.
The questions driving the inquiry should be interesting
and important to the education program faculty. The questions should
take into account the relationship between teaching and student
learning, both important indicators of quality. The questions should
not simply be designed to comply with the external demands of accrediting
bodies and state agencies. The questions should reflect the unique
mission of the program and the goal of preparing competent, caring,
qualified professional educators.
Process principle three: audits to ensure
quality. An audit provides an external verification of
the program’s internal quality assurance mechanisms and the
evidence they produce.
An academic audit is an investigative review of
the way a program is producing student learning, assessing the outcomes
of instruction, making improvements in the program, and gaining
institutional support for the program.
An academic audit does not evaluate quality itself:
instead, it verifies the processes that are intended to produce
quality. TEAC’s approach to the audit emphasizes both the
quality processes and the evidence of student learning and accomplishment.
TEAC’s approach requires the program faculty
to live up to its publicly proclaimed high expectations for the
program and its improvement. This is accomplished when the institution
and program demonstrate accountability to the public for those high
expectations by displaying solid evidence of student learning.
Process principle four: frugality.
The accreditation process is weakened when a program faculty takes
steps solely for the purpose of satisfying a requirement. The TEAC
accreditation process is designed to be efficient and use the minimum
resources necessary to reach timely decisions. For example:
- The process should be a part of the normal quality control
system the program employs.
- The document that the program produces to provide evidence
of its quality, the Inquiry Brief or Inquiry Brief
Proposal, is the length of a research monograph, about
50 pages. It is based primarily on existing documents, such
as reports of ongoing inquiry, other accrediting reports, and
institutional research and other publications. It focuses on
what the program faculty wants and needs to know about the program’s
performance. (Return to summary outline.)
|
