PREPARING FOR AN AER REVIEW A Handy Things-To-Do List
-
Upload
burke-bolton -
Category
Documents
-
view
18 -
download
0
description
Transcript of PREPARING FOR AN AER REVIEW A Handy Things-To-Do List
PREPARING FOR AN AER REVIEWA Handy Things-To-Do List
Joint URC/UEP Presentation
INTRODUCTION
William Wiener
Presenters:
Laura Bozeman
Liz Chamberlain
Kevin Hollinger
Donna Lee
Olga Overbury
William Wiener
George Zimmerman
CURRENT STATUS OF AER PROGRAM APPROVAL
Past hiatus of program review
Ongoing effort for the past 6 years
STRUCTURE
The University Approval Process consists of efforts by volunteers serving in one of three capacities:
Members of the University Review Committee (URC)
Members of the University Executive Panel (UEP)
Members of Review Panels
STANDARDS
During the past six years the URC has revised the standards in O&M, VRT, and TVI.
REVIEWS
Also, during this time, the Review Panels and UEP have conducted reviews of 10 programs.
PROCESSING FEE
A fee of $1750 is required to cover administrative costs of the approval process including recruitment and training of new panel reviewers, selection of reviewers, telephone conference calls, use of online survey instruments, and report preparation.
There are discounts for multiple reviews.
REVIEW TEAMS
Each review requires a team of four reviewers who each receive a small stipend for their work.
APPROVAL STATUS
Programs are either fully approved, conditionally approved, or not approved. A conditionally approved program must meet specified standards within one calendar year from the time that approval is granted.
ANNUAL FOLLOW-UP
Approved programs must annually complete and submit the University Preparation Program Update, a short yearly checklist.
ASSEMBLING DOCUMENTS & NAMING FILES
Olga Overbury
REQUIRED DOCUMENTS
Letter of intent ( 30 days prior to submission )
Application fee ( $1,750 )
Application ( Section I – III ) Background information Program information Program narrative
APPLICATION – SECTION I
Background Information University name Program name Contact person & contact information Dean & contact information Department head & contact information URLs for university, department,
program Who should be notified of review
outcome?
APPLICATION – SECTION II
Program information Curriculum vitae for all program faculty & staff Current & proposed budgets Inventory of program materials for candidate use
Additional program information When was the program established? What is the total number of students each year? How many students graduate each year? How many students withdrew in the last 3 years? List of clinical placements used in the past year
APPLICATION – SECTION III
Program narrative (max: 7 double-spaced pages) Provide overview, philosophy & conceptual framework of
the program Describe the program strengths Describe the areas in need of improvement & plans for
remediation Describe the goals & plans for immediate & long-range
changes Describe the expected obstacles when pursuing these goals Describe the supports available to assist in meeting goals Describe the process used to set goals, evaluate progress, etc.
REQUIRED DOCUMENTS
Letter of intent ( 30 days prior to submission )
Application fee ( $1,750 )
Application ( Section I – III )
Self-study of core standards
Self-study of curricular standards
Budget
Faculty credentials & certifications
Faculty Curriculum Vitae
Clinical experience
Clinical supervisors
Sample letters to sites
Sample logs
Course syllabi
NAMING DOCUMENTS
Rex
Skippy
MarvinBabet
te
Caroline
Eugenia
NAMING DOCUMENTS
Application ( Section I – III )
Program narrative
Core standards
Curricular standards
Budget
Faculty credentials & certifications
Faculty Curriculum Vitae
Clinical experience
Clinical supervisors
Sample letters to sites
Sample logs
Course syllabi
STEPS IN UPLOADING MATERIALS
Electronic Submission
AER website
Use Dropbox
SELECTING A PANEL Kevin Hollinger
SELECTING A PANEL
Recruitment of Volunteers
Volunteer Training
Distribution of Modules 1, 2, and 3 (Training Materials) Core, Absolute and Curricular Standards
Assembling the 3 member Panel (a.k.a. “the Team”) 2/3 are university faculty; 1/3 non-university member 2/3 certified in area of review; 1/3 from another
specialty
PROCESS OF THE PANEL
Kick-Off Panelist Phone Conference review the process establish timelines define roles select Panel Leader
Review the Standards Met, Partially Met, Not Met
Compile the Results (Survey Monkey)
PROCESS OF THE PANEL (cont’d)
Second Panelist Phone Conference discuss discrepancies and rationales collect notes to include in University and Student
interviews
University Representative Phone Conference (1) and University Student Phone Conference (2-3) established questions interview guideline questions generated from panel
PROCESS OF THE PANEL (cont’d)
Final Panelist Phone Conference
Panel Leader summarizes the University and Student interviews for panel
Discusses final recommendations for Review Scores Panel determines FINAL RECOMMENDATION
(Approved ~ Conditional Approval ~ Non-Approved)
Complete Final Survey Monkey
PROCESS OF THE PANEL (cont’d)
Panel Leader completes the REVIEW PANEL REPORT to University Executive Panel
University Executive Panel determines FINAL APPROVAL status Communicates decision to University
Program applying
USE OF SURVEY MONKEY TO EVALUATE COMPETENCY
COMPLIANCE
Kevin Hollinger
REVIEWING STANDARDS & SURVEY MONKEY
Divide Standards at Kickoff Panelist Phone Conference Panel Leader and Panel all review CORE and ABSOLUTE
Standards Panel Divided into 2 teams to split the CURRICULAR
Standards
Conduct Standard Review based on submitted documentation Met ~ Partially Met ~ Not Met
Enter Score into Survey Monkey Comments for any “partially met” or “not met”
REVIEWING STANDARDS & SURVEY MONKEY (cont’d)
Scores compiled in preparation for second panelist phone conference
Panel Team discussions and follow-up with University and Students occur
Final review score re-entered into Survey Monkey
Final Survey Monkey used to write REVIEW PANEL REPORT FINAL RECOMMENDATION made to UEP
INTERVIEWS WITH UNIVERSITY ADMINISRATION & STUDENTS
Donna Lee & Liz Chamberlain
SAMPLE INTERVIEW GUIDELINES FOR TEAM LEADER
Scheduling of Interviews Administrator interview: Plan 15 minutes Faculty interview: Plan 30 minutes Student interview: Plan 30 minutes
Getting started Explain the purpose of the interview is to
gather additional information about the application.
Ask if there are any questions before you begin.
ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW
Required questions: Tell me about the university’s commitment to
the ___________ program. How is the performance of faculty members
reviewed?
Sample optional questions (ask a minimum of one) How do you plan to continue this program if
federal funding is lost? How does the university support this program?
FACULTY INTERVIEWS
Interview a minimum of one faculty member knowledgeable about the program as a whole.
Ideally, you will also interview at least one other faculty member/instructor either at the same time or in a separate interview.
FACULTY INTERVIEWS
Required questions
How do you ensure that all of your courses are accessible to students with and without disabilities?
Explain how you provide your candidates with adequate preparation to work with consumers/students of a variety or ages, ability levels, and cultural backgrounds.
Describe a typical clinical experience for your candidates. How do you ensure that students are matched with
appropriate placements for their clinical experience? What training and supervision do you provide to your onsite
supervisors/master teachers working with your candidates in their clinical placements?
FACULTY INTERVIEWS
Sample optional questions (ask at least 2)
What degree or certificate options does your program offer?
How do you document that students are making adequate progress through their course of studies?
When we reviewed your syllabi, we noticed that standard was not listed on any syllabus. Is this a standard that you cover? If so, how do you cover it?
STUDENT INTERVIEWS
Ideally, you will interview at least three candidates who are nearing the end of their program or recent graduates so that you are presented with multiple points of view.
Required questions: What do you see as the greatest strengths of
the program you are completing? What are some areas in which you wish you
received more instruction or experience?
STUDENT INTERVIEWS
Sample optional questions (ask at least 2)
What were your experiences in accessing library materials and resources?
Describe how well you and your fellow students were able to access online course materials, especially for students with disabilities?
How well-prepared do you feel to teach ? Select one or more specific topics (e.g., Braille instruction, intersection analysis) and/or populations (e.g., infants and toddlers, deafblind consumers).
REVIEWER-GENERATED QUESTIONS
Prior to the interview, review the standards and compose questions to verify that standards have been adequately met. Ex., If your review of syllabi for an O&M program
indicated that only one course had objectives for working with students with additional disabilities, you might ask, “How well prepared do you feel you are to work with students with visual impairments and additional disabilities?” or “What information and experiences have you been provided about working with students with visual impairments and additional disabilities?”
QUESTIONS FROM PROGRAMS
Can we send our application on a thumb drive when our documentation is a URL?
How long does the process take?
When and how will we be notified about the committee 's decision?
APPROVAL CATEGORIES & CRITERIA
Laura Bozeman & George Zimmerman
CATEGORIES OF APPROVAL
Full Approval Met minimum standards for all absolute
criteria and at least 95% of critical criteria
Conditional Approval Did not meet minimum standards on 1 of the
absolute criteria and/or Met between 85% - 94% of the critical criteria
AND Agree to correct shortcomings and meet
criteria for full approval within 1 year from date of review
FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES& CHECKLIST
Monitoring Compliance An annual questionnaire was developed and will be
sent to all AER URC Approved programs annually as a way to monitor compliance with the standards
Annual Questionnaire/Checklist (sample items) Delivery Methods (on-line or on-campus) Full Time Faculty (numbers or credentials) Adjunct Faculty (numbers or credentials) University Clinical Supervisors (numbers or credentials) Credentials or Experience of Clinical Onsite Supervisors Faculty to Student Ratios
THE FUTURE:REESTABLISHING THE LINK
WITH ACVREP William Wiener
HISTORY
Earlier in our history, AER University Program Approval was a key requirement within ACVREP O&M and VRT Eligibility criteria for a candidate to sit for the certification examination.
In 2003, ACVREP expressed some concern about the following issues relative to the program and discontinued reliance of AER Approval:
ACVREP’S CONCERNS
Lack of consistency of review periods
Legitimacy/defensibility of program determinations (approved or not-approved)
Lack of dedicated AER staff to insure efficient operation of the program
No access to certification for students graduating from programs that were not-approved or had not applied for the approval process
No data on the commitment of the universities to pursue program approval
PROPOSAL FOR ALIGNMENTWITH ACVREP
During the past several years, AER addressed all of the concerns mentioned by ACVREP.
Earlier this year, AER requested that ACVREP consider the URC proposal that would once again use AER University Program Approval as the main avenue for eligibility to sit for the certification examinations in O&M, VRT, and TVI.
ALIGNEMENT ( cont’d )
ACVREP responded by asking further questions of the AER Executive Director relating what would be the added value of such an additional requirement. Director Tutt responded:
evaluation of each and every standard examination of course syllabi, reading assignments, and exercises examination of qualifications of the faculty verification of number and type of practice hours and adequacy of
supervisors adequacy of clinical supervision interviews with faculty interviews with students
The ACVREP Board met last month and voted against accepting alignment with AER
NEXT STEPS
Communication has been initiated with ACVREP President Jay Stitley
Invitation was issued to meet at this conference
Communication has been initiated with RSA and OSEP regarding the status of the programs that have been approved by AER
Invitation for remaining universities to submit for AER review
THANK YOU !
ANY QUESTIONS