Using the Joint Standards to Design Postsecondary Assessments With Evidence of Validity and Reliability: An Approach to CAEP Accreditation

Abstract

Validity and reliability are a major focus in teacher education accreditation by the Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). CAEP requires the use of “accepted research standards,” but many faculty and administrators are unsure how to meet this requirement. The Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing abbreviated Joint Standards, are the implied accepted research standards. The purpose of this study was to test empirically the extent to which the Joint Standards could serve this purpose. The primary outcome of this study is a pragmatic set of implementation strategies organized into assessment specifications connecting CAEP requirements to the Joint Standards. An example set of assessment specifications is provided. Use of this process can improve assessments in any academic discipline for any accreditation agency, become a faculty professional development tool, raise assessment literacy, and potentially impact instruction of future educators.

Quality Evaluation of Special Education Teacher Preparation Programs at the Northern Governorates Universities in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in Light of CAEP Standards

“…The current study agrees with some studies in using the descriptive analytical approach and questionnaire as one of the data collection methods, such as the study of (Al-Anny, et al, 2018), and also has similarities with each (Al-Hamadneh, 2020), (Samadi, 2016), (Qadan, 2018), (Aqeel, 2017), (Qadan, 2018), and (Young, 2018) studies in evaluating the Special Education Teachers Preparation Program in Higher Education Institutions. The current study differs from the rest of previous studies in its place, time, sample, and purpose, whereas Aqeel (2017) study focused on the requirements of developing study programs for special education departments in universities; following quality standards and academic accreditation, and (Young, 2018) study focused on the quality of special education teacher preparation programs from the standpoint of teachers, while (Wilkerson, 2020) study included validity and reliability test as a key focus in the adoption of teacher preparation by CAEP. The current study dealt with the evaluation of the Special Education Teacher Preparation Program in the Northern governorates universities of H.K of Jordan, in light of international standards like CAEP, and also differs in the study sample and its place of implementation, where the researcher implemented it in the special education departments of public and private Jordanian universities during (2021/2022).…”

“…Recommendations and solutions will be made in each case, and at the end, the researcher identified three priority areas for improvement: the participation and development of faculty members, the adaption of quality assurance strategies, and the employment of a curriculum improvement strategy. (Wilkerson, 2020) conducted a study to examine the validity and reliability as a key focus in the adoption of teacher preparation by CAEP, which requires the use of "acceptable research standards" but many faculty and administrators are unsure of the way to meet this requirement, where the short educational and psychological testing standards and common standards are implicitly accepted research standards. The purpose of this study was an experimental test of teachers standing and the initial result is a practical set of implementation strategies organized in evaluation specifications that link requirements of environmental and social assessment programs with the common standards, where it's possible to provide a set of examples on evaluation specifications.…”

A study on Chinese teacher education professional accreditation based on the standards comparison

“…For example, CAEP standards will "Employer Satisfaction" as one of the accreditation objectives. Its basic requirements are EPP to use evidence to show that employers are very satisfied with the professional ability of pre-service teachers [6].…”