GUIDELINES FOR PROCESS AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROVIDERS

GUIDELINES FOR PROCESS AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROVIDERS MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DIVISION OF EDUCATOR PREPARATION 359 NORTH WEST STREET JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39201 DR. LANCE EVANS STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Table of Contents Section I: OVERVIEW Mississippi EPP Process and Performance Guidelines Authority Mississippi Code Ann. § 37-3-2 authorizes the Licensure Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development (Licensure Commission) to recommend to the Mississippi State Board of Education (SBE) the standards for educator licensure and the approval of Mississippi Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) licensure programs. Through enforcement of the standards and rigorous review processes, the Licensure Commission and SBE assures the public and Mississippi’s P-12 students that EPP programs meet state and national standards prior to recommending candidates for licensure. It shall be the purpose and duty of the Licensure Commission to make recommendations to the SBE regarding standards for the certification and licensure and continuing professional development of those who teach or perform tasks of an educational nature in the public schools of Mississippi. The Licensure Commission’s specific duties are prescribed further in Miss. Code Ann. § 37-3-2. The Licensure Commission is responsible for the following: • Licensure: The Licensure Commission sets standards and criteria for licensure, subject to the approval of the SBE, and authorizes the Office of Teaching and Leading (OTL) to license teachers, administrators, school personnel service specialists and other school related personnel. • Professional Practices: The Licensure Commission sets and enforces professional standards for competent and ethical conduct of educators. • Educator Preparation Providers: The Licensure Commission makes recommendations to the SBE on EPP program approvals and or modifications. Statement of Assurance It is the policy of the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) that no person be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation in any program, service, or activity for which the SBE is responsible. The SBE will comply with the requirements of state and federal law concerning non-discrimination and will strive by its actions to enhance the dignity and worth of all persons. Purpose of Guidelines These guidelines are designed to provide EPPs with the standards necessary to earn licensure program approval. Complete guidance on program review procedures is found in the EPP Program Review Workbook. The 2021 Mississippi Educator Preparation Provider Process and Performance Guidelines replaced the Administrative Process and Performance Review Process 2006. These guidelines provide information on: • traditional and alternate preparation pathways, • EPP accreditation and state program review, • EPP annual reporting processes, • EPP curriculum requirements, • program entrance and exit requirements, • new or modified program proposal requests, and • glossary of terms. Common Abbreviations CAEP Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation EPP Educator Preparation Provider EPPCC Educator Preparation Provider Collaborative Committee ESOL English for Speakers of Other Languages HELC Higher Education Literacy Council IHE Institutions of Higher Education LC Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development MACTE Mississippi Association of Colleges for Teacher Education MDE MECCA Mississippi Department of Education Mississippi Educator Career Continuum Archive MELFA Mississippi Educational Leadership Faculty Association IHL Mississippi’s Public Institutions of Higher Learning OTL SBE SPA MDE Office of Teaching and Leading Mississippi State Board of Education Specialized Professional Association SPED Special Education Introduction and Background The annual review process of approved teacher education programs was an outgrowth of the Mississippi Education Reform Act, 1982. This Act called for the setting of standards and criteria for teacher education programs in Mississippi colleges and universities. Two critical questions had considerable impact upon this process: 1. What professional knowledge is essential for beginning teachers? 2. Which teaching skills and abilities are most effective? In 1997, the teacher licensure process was updated and the standards for teacher licensure programs were revised. The following components are the basis for the teacher education process: • Each applicant for entry into a teacher licensure program shall demonstrate academic ability on a test approved by the Licensure Commission and the Mississippi State Board of Education (SBE). • Each applicant for a standard license shall graduate from a nationally accredited teacher education program and shall pass the state-approved tests in order to demonstrate knowledge of pedagogy and competency of the subject to be taught. • Each educator shall successfully complete individual professional development requirements during a five-year timeframe for continued licensure. The Process and Performance Review had as its purpose the enactment of a voluntary peer review process designed to help ensure Mississippi educator preparation programs would “produce competent, caring, and qualified teachers and other professional school personnel who can help all students learn.” Again in 2009, the MDE, the Mississippi Institutions of Higher Learning (MS-IHL), and the Mississippi Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (MACTE) began discussion about improving the rigor of the state review process. The discussion centered around utilizing state standards more closely aligned to the national accreditation standards to further promote an accredited EPP’s ability “to engage in continuous improvement based on accurate and consistent data [and to] remain current, relevant, and productive so that graduates of these EPPs are able to have a positive impact on P-12 student learning” (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2002). Thus, state- sponsored reviews are conducted for the ongoing dual purposes of continuous accountability and creative reform within the process by which competent educational professionals are produced for the P-12 learning environment. The MDE formed a committee of stakeholders in 2009 to begin the process of revising the state standards to align with the most current National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) standards and review process. In 2010, NCATE and the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) announced intentions to merge to establish one unified national accrediting body, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). This decision would ultimately affect the current NCATE standards and thus the state’s alignment to the most current standards. With the transition to CAEP, the MDE tabled the 2009 committee recommendation to revise the state process. In 2012, the MDE and an expanded committee moved forward to redesign the state review process and align state standards with the current NCATE standards until full transition to CAEP was complete. In 2017, the SBE approved the CAEP partnership and accepted CAEP standards and Mississippi standards for program review and approval. In 2018, the SBE established Mississippi Administrative Code 7-3: 14.2, State Board Policy Chapter 14, Rule 14.20 which required all EPPs to obtain national accreditation as recommended by the Licensure Commission. As a result, the MDE began redesigning process guidelines for EPPs. Stakeholder feedback was solicited throughout the developmental process and public comment period. The first program review pilots were conducted in the fall of 2019. On May 20, 2021, the final version of the Mississippi Educator Preparation Provider Guidelines for Process and Performance Review was approved by the State Board of Education. On June 16, 2022, during a five (5) year policy review, the State Board repealed Mississippi Administrative Code 7-3: 14.2, and established Mississippi Administrative Code 7-3: Chapter 6, Rule 6.2, National Accreditation for Mississippi Educator Preparation Providers. Equity Information In 2015, the MDE submitted to the U.S. Department of Education a plan developed to address the long-term needs for improving equitable access to great teachers in Mississippi. The plan described the steps the MDE would take to ensure children from poor and minority backgrounds are not taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, non-highly qualified, or emergency certified educators teaching outside their areas of certification as is required in Section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 (ESEA). Although the MDE recognized the importance of leadership in eliminating equity gaps, the plan focused on strategies for teachers. The plan contains the following components: • a description of the steps the MDE took to consult with Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), teachers, principals, pupil services personnel, administrators, staff, parents, and other stakeholders in the development of the plan; • identification of equity gaps and an explanation of the calculations and process of identification; • an explanation of the likely cause(s) of the identified equity gaps; • an explanation of the steps the MDE will take to eliminate the identified gaps; • a description of the measures that the MDE will use to evaluate progress toward eliminating the identified equity gaps for both poor students and minority students; and • a description of how the MDE will publicly report its progress. In developing the plan, the MDE received assistance from the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) and the Southeast Comprehensive Center (both at the American Institutes for Research), and the Research and Curriculum Unit (RCU) at Mississippi State University. To create this plan, a team of stakeholders and leaders at the MDE took the following steps. 1. Developed and began implementing a long-term strategy for engaging stakeholders in ensuring equitable access to excellent educators. 2. Reviewed data provided by the U.S. Department of Education and the MDE’s Office of Technology and Strategic Services (OTSS), to identify equity gaps. 3. Conducted root-cause analyses to identify the challenges fundamental to equity gaps. 4. Created a plan with measurable targets. The Office of Teaching and Leading (OTL) The offices of Teaching and Leading and Educator Continuum are organized into seven divisions: Division of Educator Effectiveness http://mdek12.org/OEE (trainings, mentoring, induction, professional growth, and recognition) 601-359-3631 Division of Educator Licensure http://mdek12.org/OEL (licensing of educators and licensure testing) 601-359-3483 teachersupport@mdek12.org Division of Educator Misconduct http://mdek12.org/OEM/Home (hearings on agreed orders and misconduct) 601-359-2742 Division of Educator Pathway Innovation https://www.mdek12.org/OTL/MTR (teacher residency, performance-based licensure, stakeholder engagement) 601-359-3631 Division of Educator Preparation http://mdek12.org/OTL/OEP/OEP (educator preparation program approval and review, Title II, accreditation support) 601-359-3631 Division of Educator Professional Development https://www.mdek12.org/OPD/home (professional development for educators and administrators) 601-359-2857 Division of Educator Talent Acquisition http://mdek12.org/OETA (recruitment, talent development, retention) 601-359-3631 Mississippi Educator Career Continuum Archive (MECCA) Licensure System The Mississippi Department of Education launched a new licensure management system replacing the Educator Licensure Management System (ELMS) on January 17, 2023. The Mississippi Educator Career Continuum Archive (MECCA) is a customized cloud-based, all-in- one, single sign-on educator workforce information management system that serves as a hub to capture the lifecycle of a Mississippi educator from recruitment to retirement. In addition to being a comprehensive licensure management system, it is also comprised of four distinct portals each designed to provide the MDE with added capacity to monitor and track teacher workforce needs based on data and to support local school districts and EPPs in providing targeted supports to teachers and teacher candidates to ensure all children have access to effective teachers and leaders in a safe learning environment. Document Submission Documents required for licensure should be uploaded directly into an applicant’s MECCA account. Information related to submitting documents may be accessed in the guidelines found on the MDE website here: Guidelines for Mississippi Licensure Section II: REPORTING CYCLES Timelines Accreditation and Program Review Schedule YEAR APPROVAL REQUIREMENT Year 1 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for State Program Approval Status Year 2 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for State Program Approval Status Year 3 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for State Program Approval Status Year 4 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for State Program Approval Status Mid-Cycle State Program Review Year 5 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for Program Approval Status Year 6 (after State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for Program Approval Status CAEP Self-Study Report Year 7 (Full State/National Accreditation Visit) Annual Report to MDE for State Program Approval Status CAEP/MDE Joint Review State teams serve as co-examiners with the CAEP national team members during the EPP CAEP joint visit. In addition to annual data, the MDE reserves the ongoing right to request for EPPs to provide supplementary information and data as needed for program review purposes. Timeline of Yearly EPP Activity/Reporting Schedule DATE ACTIVITY January MDE Educator Preparation Update Webinar: Annual Report January 31 Programs submit mid-cycle report February 1-26 ETS resolution period February 15 New and modified program requests due for fall implementation March 31 MDE Annual Report due April 1 Student Teaching Placement Report for spring April 30 CAEP Annual Report due April 30 Title II Annual Report due May New and modified program requests for fall implementation, CAEP Accreditation decisions, and Program Review decisions presented to the Licensure Commission June 15 New and modified program requests due for spring implementation June/July Programs identified for Mid-Cycle Review July May’s Licensure Commission new and modified program requests presented to State Board of Education for fall implementation July MS-IHL Completer Report August 31 ETS Title II website opens for IHEs September New and modified program requests for spring implementation presented to the Licensure Commission September MDE Educator Preparation Update Webinar: policies, initiatives, etc. October September’s Licensure Commission new and modified program requests presented to State Board of Education for spring implementation November Annual EPP Data, CAEP Accreditation decisions, and Program Review decisions presented to the Licensure Commission November 1 Student Teaching Placement Report for fall November 6 ETS Title II website closes Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) is a non-governmental, voluntary association committed to the effective preparation of teachers and other P-12 professional educators. CAEP has responsibility for granting CAEP national accreditation to an EPP in accordance with its policies and procedures. The State has sole responsibility for granting the approval of programs leading to licensure. Through the State-CAEP partnership agreement, the MDE’s review will align with CAEP standards and will include information provided from CAEP reviews. Summary of CAEP Standards Additional information on CAEP 2022 standards can be found on CAEP’s website. Detailed information on the specific standards is included later in this section. Standard 1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge Standard 2: Clinical Partnerships and Practice Standard 3: Candidate Recruitment, Progression, and Support Standard 4: Program Impact Standard 5: Quality Assurance System and Continuous Improvement Standard 6: Fiscal and Administrative Capacity Standard 7: Record of Compliance with Title IV of the Higher Education Act Technology and Diversity In addition to the five programmatic standards, diversity and technology are important components in educator preparation. These components are vital to all aspects of educator preparation, and therefore, embedded in the standards. Advanced-Level Programs CAEP provides standards for post-baccalaureate or graduate-level programs leading to an initial licensure, certification, or endorsement. These programs are designed to further develop P-12 teachers who have already completed an initial preparation program, currently licensed administrators, and other certified (or similar state language) school professionals for employment in P-12 schools / districts. Information on CAEP Standards for Advanced-Level Programs can be found here. Advanced-level programs subject to review by CAEP include: Admin/Leadership (486) Psychometry (213) SPED Severe Disability (222) Athletic Administration (495) School Counselor (436) SPED Visual Impair (218) Dyslexia Therapy (203) SPED Emo Disability (206) Speech Language Path (215) Gifted (207) SPED Mild/Mod (221) STEM (983) Health (143) Advanced-level programs not reviewed by CAEP include: • advanced-level degree programs not specific to the preparation of teachers or other school professionals for P-12 schools/districts; • advanced-level, non-licensure degree programs, including those specific to content areas (e.g. M.S., M.A., Ph.D.); • educational leadership programs not specific to the preparation of teachers or other school professionals for P-12 schools/districts; and • other advanced level programs already approved by another national accreditor recognized by either the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) or the U.S. Department of Education. Add-on Programs MDE supplemental endorsements are add-on programs which are designed for educators who hold valid teaching licenses to add additional teaching field(s) to their licenses without completing an additional degree. These programs are not subject to CAEP review. CAEP Resources The CAEP Revised 2022 Standards Workbook is the source for CAEP accreditation procedures. • Preface: Timeline and Steps In Preparing to Write the Self-Study Report (SSR) • Standards for Initial-Licensure Preparation (component, key concepts, guiding questions, quality evidence, and connections to other standards) • Standards for Advanced-Level Preparation (component, key concepts, guiding questions, quality evidence, and connections to other standards) • Appendices (criteria for evaluation of EPP-created assessments, criteria for evaluation of EPP-created surveys, transition and phase-in plan schedules and guidelines, and hyperlinks to CAEP Accreditation Council Policy and Procedures, glossary, and example template for transition plans) Accreditation Information Management System (AIMS) AIMS is CAEP's data collection and management system used by: • EPPs to submit and access reports and forms; • CAEP staff to monitor the accreditation process, site visitor assignments and reports, program reviews, annual reports, and state partnership agreements; • CAEP site visitors and Accreditation Council members as a workspace to review and complete assignments related to accreditation and/or governance; and • State partners to access accreditation information on EPPs in the state. For assistance, contact the Help Desk: techsupport@caepnet.org. Title II of the Higher Education Act Background Sections 205 through 208 of Title II of the Higher Education Act (HEA), as amended in 2008, (PL 110-315) call for accountability for programs that prepare teachers. Section 205 of Title II requires reports from each institution of higher education (IHE) that conducts a traditional teacher preparation program or an alternative route to state certification or licensure program and that enrolls students receiving federal assistance under HEA (e.g., Title IV). The law requires IHEs to submit timely and accurate reports or risk a fine of up to $27,500. For purposes of Title II, a program completer is a person who has met all the state’s educational and/or training requirements for initial certification or licensure to teach in the state’s elementary, middle, or secondary schools. The law can be accessed at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html. Program completers include all those who are documented as having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of: • degree, • institutional certificate, • program credential, • transcript, or • other written proof of having met the program’s requirements. In applying this definition, the fact that an individual has or has not been recommended to the state for initial certification or licensure may not be used as a criterion for determining who is a program completer. State Report Card States submit Title II data through the Institution and Program Report Card reporting system (IPRC). The IPRC is an online reporting system supported by the Title II Support Center at RTI International. Under Title II regulations, states must implement a system to assess the quality of each teacher preparation program. Section 207 State Functions (a) State Assessment: In order to receive funds under this Act, a state shall conduct an assessment to identify low-performing teacher preparation programs in the state and to assist such programs through the provision of technical assistance. Each state shall provide the Secretary with an annual list of low-performing teacher preparation programs and an identification of those programs at risk of being placed on such list, as applicable. Such assessment shall be described in the report under section 205(b). Levels of performance shall be determined solely by the state and may include criteria based on information collected pursuant to this part, including progress in meeting the goals of: 1. increasing the percentage of highly qualified teachers in the state, including increasing professional development opportunities; 2. improving student academic achievement for elementary and secondary students; and 3. raising the standards for entry into the teaching profession. EPPs not meeting the state’s performance levels at the end of the reporting year will be designated “at-risk of low-performing” or “low-performing.” At Risk of Low-Performing: An “At Risk of Low-Performing” EPP is identified as one with a national accreditation rating with stipulations or an EPP that does not meet two (2) of the four (4) performance measures as identified in item number two (2). 1. National accreditation with stipulations indicates all programs are at risk of becoming low performing. or 2. EPP did not meet two (2) of the following four (4) performance criteria: a. Licensure exam aggregate pass rate at or above 80%. b. GPA cohort average at or above 3.0 measured at program completion. c. Average student teaching evaluation scores on the Teacher Intern Assessment Instrument (TIAI) at or above 2.0. d. Average Professional Dispositions scores at or above 2.0. Low-Performing: A “Low-Performing” EPP is one that did not make improvements by the end of the reporting year in which a designation of “At Risk of Low-Performing” was assigned, or an EPP with a national accreditation rating of probationary, or an EPP that does not meet two (2) of the four (4) performance measures as identified in item number two (2).  1. National accreditation with probation indicates all programs are low performing. or 2. EPP did not meet two (2) of the following four (4) performance criteria: a. Licensure exam aggregate pass rate at or above 70%. b. GPA cohort average at or above 2.7 measured at program completion. c. Average student teaching evaluation scores on TIAI at or above 1.5. d. Average Professional Dispositions scores at or above 1.5. Institutional and Program Report Card In 1998, Westat partnered with the Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE) with the US Department of Education (DOE) to collect the congressionally mandated accountability information. Beginning 2021, the US DOE awarded a new contractor to support the Title II HEA data collection to Trewon Technologies and RTI International. Beginning in 2023, Trewon supports EPPs in preparing their state report cards and collects data from states that are reported to the Department of Education and to Congress. Data are collected through the Institutional and Program Report Card (IPRC), an online survey tool, by which IHEs and other organizations with state-approved teacher preparation programs can meet the annual reporting requirements. IHEs are responsible for developing their own internal systems or processes to collect the required information to enter into the IPRC system. The IPRC reporting cycle closes on April 30 annually. When the day falls on a weekend, the deadline remains the same. MDE staff provide EPPs with ongoing support and assistance as needed. IPRC data can be accessed on the US Department of Education Title II website. For technical assistance using the IPRC, access the user manual or contact the help desk: title2@trewon.com. Trewon Technologies 800 Corporate Dr. Suite #301 Stafford, VA 22554 Phone: 703-242-1378 title2@trewon.com https://title2.ed.gov/Public/Home.aspx Pearson Support Toll-Free: 800-998-3787 https://www.educationreports.net Section III: STATE APPROVAL Educator Preparation Provider State Board Approval Process for New EPP Approval There is establish within the State Department of Education, the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development (Licensure Commission). It shall be the purpose and duty of the Licensure Commission to make recommendations to the State Board of Education regarding standards for the certification and licensure and continuing professional development of those who teach or perform tasks of an educational nature in the public schools of Mississippi. Mississippi Code Ann. § 37-3-2 (1). It shall be the duty of the Licensure Commission to set standards and criteria, subject to the approval of the State Board of Education, for all educator preparation programs in the state and to make recommendations to the State Board of Education each year approval or disapproval of each educator preparation program in the state, subject to a process and schedule determined by the State Board of Education. Mississippi Code Ann. § 37-3-2 (5)(a)(b). The following types of EPPs are eligible to apply to the Mississippi Department of Education to request State Board of Education approval for licensure: • Mississippi-based public institutions of higher education (IHEs) authorized by the Mississippi Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) working in collaboration with at least one local education agency (LEA) with which the IHE has established a primary partnership. • Mississippi-based private institutions of higher education (IHEs) accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) working in collaboration with at least one local education agency (LEA) with which the IHE has established a primary partnership. • Mississippi-based non-IHE alternative preparation providers working in collaboration with at least one LEA with whom the alternative provider has established a primary partnership. The following steps shall be taken when requesting State Board approval to prepare candidates for licensure with the Mississippi Department of Education. 1. The EPP shall submit the appropriate form designated for New Provider requests to the Division of Educator Preparation 2. The Division of Educator Preparation reviews the request and schedules a meeting with the EPP to discuss the state’s process for establishing an EPP in Mississippi and to answer any questions the EPP may have. 3. The request shall be presented to the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development (Licensure Commission). 4. The Licensure Commission’s recommendation shall be presented to the State Board of Education for approval. To be considered for initial state approval, an EPP shall provide evidence of meeting the state’s standards and the national standards for educator preparation as established by the national accreditor with whom the state has established an agreed upon partnership. All processes for earning state approval are found within the EPP Guidelines, Program Review Workbook, and/or on the Division of Educator Preparation’s page of the MDE website. The Mississippi State Board of Education does not accredit EPPs but maintains authority over educator preparation programs leading to licensure with the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE). To be considered for initial approval to prepare candidates for licensure in Mississippi, all new EPP applicants shall maintain a physical location in the state and meet all standards adopted by the Mississippi State Board of Education (SBE) as codified in Miss. Code Ann. § 37- 3-2 and Mississippi Administrative Code Title 7 Part 107. Process for Closing an EPP If an EPP makes the decision to discontinue providing educator preparation for the state, the EPP shall submit the appropriate form designated for Program Deletion for each program approved by the state. The EPP shall discontinue admitting candidates into the program(s) and notify existing candidates that the EPP will no longer recommend candidates for licensure with the Mississippi Department of Education. The EPP shall submit a teach out plan to ensure all existing program candidates matriculate through the licensure process. Copies of candidate notification letters shall be submitted to the MDE’s Divisions of Licensure and Educator Preparation along with a list of the candidates that were notified. The list shall include candidates’ names, social security numbers, and anticipated date of program completion. The following steps shall be taken when closing an EPP. 1. The EPP shall submit written notice to the Division of Educator Preparation of its plan to close. 2. The EPP shall submit the appropriate form designated for Program Deletion to the Division of Educator Preparation. 3. The Division of Educator Preparation schedules a meeting with the EPP to discuss the teach out plan, timeline for closing the EPP, and the required elements needed to ensure exiting program candidates are supported through the licensure process. 4. The EPP closure request shall be presented to the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development (Licensure Commission). 5. The Licensure Commission’s recommendation shall be presented to the State Board of Education for approval. NOTE: Program deletion forms shall be submitted to the Division of Educator Preparation once the closure date is established by an EPP’s internal leadership and Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) if applicable. EPPs have up to 90 days from the completion of the approved teach out plan to recommend candidates for licensure. The EPP is responsible for communicating with candidates enrolled in programs that are scheduled to close that they will have up to 90 days from institutional recommendation to submit a complete application for licensure. An application is considered complete once all supporting documentation is received by the Division of Licensure. Process for Continuing State Approval The Mississippi State Board of Education (SBE) approved the CAEP Partnership Agreement to guide state review of educator preparation programs. EPPs have the option to further demonstrate program quality by voluntarily pursuing national recognition through Specialized Professional Associations (SPAs); however, the MDE maintains sole authority for program review and approval. Comprehensive program reviews shall be conducted at the EPP level on a seven-year cycle in coordination with an EPP’s national accreditation schedule or at the individual licensure program level on an as needed basis. Complete guidance on program review procedures is found in the EPP Program Review Workbook. The MDE’s process for EPP review is comprised of multiple measures which include, but are not limited to, program reviews, annual reports, student teacher placement information, and satisfaction surveys from candidates and employers. Annual Report Each institution of higher learning with a teacher education program approved by the State Board of Education shall prepare and submit to the State Board of Education and to the Board of Trustees of State Institutions of Higher Learning an annual performance report on the institution’s teacher education program. (Miss. Code Ann. §37-101-29) The EPP annual report shall be submitted electronically to the MDE on or before March 31. The annual report submission shall align with CAEP and Title II annual reports. The annual report submitted by EPPs shall include all required elements to meet the requirements of Miss. Code Ann. §37-101-29 which include but are not limited to: • performance and demographic data on admitted candidates and completers, including individual GPAs and cohort GPAs for each academic year: fall, spring, summer; • data on professional education faculty qualifications and participation in ongoing professional learning in collaboration with MDE state supported initiatives; • number of program completers scoring at or above the proficiency level (passing score) on the state licensure test. (Praxis II exams, Foundations of Reading Test, and School Leaders Licensure Assessment); and • statewide common assessment scores for all applicable programs. Student Teacher Placement Report Each EPP with a teacher education program approved by the SBE shall submit to the MDE student teacher placement information each spring and fall semester. Placement information shall include: • teacher candidate information to include name, educator identification number, email, licensure area, number of hours of student teaching, placement start and end dates, placement school and district, and grade level of placement. • cooperating teacher information to include name, educator identification number, email, employing school/grades, and licensure area. • university supervisor information to include name, educator identification number and email. For CAEP Standard 2 SSR reporting purposes, EPPs should consider documenting calibration scores each year to demonstrate inter-rater reliability. Comprehensive Program Reviews The purpose of program review is to ensure programs leading to licensure with the Mississippi Department of Education have undergone review within a seven-year cycle and have met all standards. Complete guidance on program review procedures is found in the EPP Program Review Workbook. The program review allows the MDE to conduct reviews of EPP programs at the mid-point or in the fourth year after a national accreditation visit. The Mid-Cycle Review will be an electronic review of licensure program content and pedagogical knowledge, clinical practice and partnerships, and candidate quality and selectivity. This review will serve to provide the EPP with feedback which may assist in preparing for the national accreditation self-study. The visit schedule is based on a seven-year accreditation cycle as outlined in the CAEP/State Review Schedule (see page 9). The MDE reserves the right to conduct an onsite visit at the discretion of the Office of Teaching and Leading, in particular when documentation or other evidence suggests that a program is not in compliance with state policy, procedures, and guidelines for educator preparation programs and/or is not effectively preparing candidates in approved programs of study. Program Review Report The Program Review Report includes each standard/component reviewed, with recommendations based on the reviewers’ findings. The report cites evidence that shows compliance with or deviation from each component/standard that applies to the EPP’s programs. The initial report and recommendation contain feedback on the evidence related to standards met and/or not met and a timeline for receiving the response from the EPP. The EPP may make amendments necessary to ensure factual information. In the event the reviewers determine the evidence presented at the mid- cycle review did not meet the standards, an addendum shall be required by the EPP. Final program approval recommendations shall be made to the Licensure Commission upon the completion of the CAEP accreditation cycle. The EPP shall submit to CAEP the required program review documentation as provided by the Division of Educator Preparation which shall be indicative of formative feedback with a proposed recommendation that shall be made to the Licensure Commission: • Recommendation of State Approved: The evidence indicates the licensure or endorsement program fully meets the program review standards. • Recommendation of State Approved with Conditions: The evidence indicates the licensure or endorsement program does not fully meet the program review standards and conditions exist that require the EPP to provide additional information about the program in an addendum. • Recommendation of Not Approved – Further Development Required: The evidence does not indicate the licensure or endorsement program meets the program review standards and extreme deficiencies exist that require the EPP to provide substantial information about the program in an addendum. EPP Addendum Programs failing to meet full state approval upon initial review shall have 90 days after receipt of the state report to submit an addendum that includes a plan of action and timeline for remediating deficiencies. The MDE will work with the EPP to provide support as needed. Targeted Assistance Visit A targeted assistance visit may be required for EPPs with programs not meeting state requirements and were recommended as needing further development. The MDE shall establish a team of state approved reviewers to work directly with the EPP to assist with remediating areas of deficiency. The assistance team members shall be comprised of members with specific expertise in the area(s) of need. • Length - Length of visit shall be one to two days as needed per conditions cited in state or national reports. • Purpose - The purpose of the visit is to provide support to the targeted EPP to assist in ensuring successful continuation of state program approval and/or national accreditation. • Timing - Timelines are based on state and/or national review cycles. • Size of review team – The team shall consist of one representative from MDE, one representative from MS-IHL, and a minimum of two representatives from four-year EPPs. • Representation from four-year institutions - Team members shall be selected based on variables specific to the targeted program(s). • Cost of visit - The EPP will be responsible for costs associated with the peer assistance visit (onsite team travel to and from campus, food, and lodging) and reimburse mileage for the state team’s travel to the visit site and travel home. • Action plan - The EPP develops and submits an action plan to address all areas of deficiency. • Annual electronic data - Reports will continue to be submitted to MDE for continuity of record keeping at the state level, even during years of assistance visits. Final Program Recommendation Final program recommendations shall be presented to the Licensure Commission in concurrence with the EPP’s national accreditation decision. Program Deletion If an EPP chooses to sunset or delete a licensure program, the EPP shall submit notice to the MDE and submit the appropriate form for Program Deletion, discontinue admitting candidates into the program, and notify existing candidates that the program no longer leads to licensure. The EPP shall submit a teach out plan to ensure program matriculation includes candidate licensure. Copies of candidate notification letters shall be submitted to the MDE’s Division of Licensure and Division of Educator Preparation along with a list of the candidates that were notified. The list shall include the candidate’s name, social security number, and anticipated date of program completion. The following steps shall be taken when programs are being deleted. 1. The EPP shall submit written notice to the Division of Educator Preparation of its plan to delete a program. 2. The EPP submits the appropriate form designated for Program Deletion to the Division of Educator Preparation. 3. The Division of Educator Preparation schedules a meeting with the EPP to discuss the teach out plan, timeline for deleting the program, and the required elements needed to ensure exiting program candidates are supported through the licensure process. 4. The program deletion request shall be presented to the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development (Licensure Commission). 5. The Licensure Commission’s recommendation is presented to the State Board of Education for final approval. NOTE: Program deletion notices shall be submitted to the Division of Educator Preparation once the closure date is established by an EPP’s internal leadership and Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) as applicable. EPPs have up to 90 days from the completion of the approved teach out plan to recommend candidates for licensure. The EPP is responsible for communicating with candidates enrolled in programs that are scheduled to close that they will have up to 90 days from institutional recommendation to submit a complete application for licensure. An application is considered complete once all supporting documentation is received. Confidentiality and Code of Ethics Program Review and Code of Ethics The program review processes are sensitive by nature. Therefore, objectivity and credibility are essential. The purpose of Educator Preparation Code of Ethics is to prevent both actual and perceived conflicts of interest and unethical behavior by MDE representatives, including staff. Educator Preparation Code of Ethics Program review team members, site visit review team members, and Division of Educator Preparation representatives and staff shall conduct themselves as thoughtful, competent, well- prepared, and impartial professionals at all times while representing the Mississippi Department of Education and Office of Teaching and Leading. To ensure institutions and the public that MDE program reviews are impartial and objective, to avoid conflicts of interest, and to promote equity and high ethical standards in the review process, representatives, program reviewers, site visit reviewers, and staff shall follow this Code of Ethics. They shall also exclude themselves from MDE activities for any other reasons not listed in the Code that may represent an actual or perceived conflict of interest. Violation of any part of the Code will result in the individual’s removal from the current program review or site visit and from future consideration for program review or site visit review teams. Fairness Representatives, program and site visit reviewers, and staff shall: • not advance personal, non-MDE, or non-CAEP approved agendas in the conduct of accreditation reviews by attempting to apply personal or partisan interpretations of standards; • examine the facts as they exist and not as they are influenced by past reputation, media accounts about EPPs or programs being reviewed; • exclude themselves from participating in MDE and CAEP activities if, to their knowledge, there is some predisposing factor that could prejudice them with respect to the accreditation of EPPs, partnerships with states, or approval of a professional organization’s guidelines; and • exclude themselves from MDE and CAEP activities if they are philosophically opposed to or are on record as having made generic criticism about a specific type of EPP or program allowable under the standards. Compensation or Gifts Program or site visit review team members, and MDE staff shall not request or accept any compensation for serving on a review team. If the giving of small tokens (e.g., coffee mugs, key chains, tee shirts, and articles that cost less than $50) is customary to an institution’s culture, these items may be accepted from the EPP. If unsure, program or site visit review team members, and MDE staff shall err on the side of caution and decline the gifts. Conflict of Interest Program and review team members and staff shall not participate in any decision-making capacity if they are engaged in a close, active association with an institution. Confidentiality Confidentiality is an integral part of the review process. The Licensure Commission, program and review team members, and staff shall have access to sensitive information in order to conduct reviews of professional education programs. MDE, review team members, and staff shall protect the confidentiality of this information. It is expected that program reviewers, site visit review team members, and staff shall: • treat as confidential all elements of the review process and information gathered as part of the process, including documents, interviews, data, discussions, interpretations, and analyses related to the review of educator preparation programs; • not discuss in public places the particulars of a program review or site visit, or the specifics of any case; and • not discuss details about an EPP related to a review or site visit with anyone other than site review team members before, during, or after the review or visit. MDE staff and Licensure Commission members shall refrain from discussing the specifics of individual cases and decisions regarding programs or EPPs with individuals who are not Licensure Commission members. Section IV: NEW PROGRAMS and PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS New Program Approval New program requests shall go to the Licensure Commission for initial approval, and if approved, submitted to the SBE for final approval. To add a new program, complete the information listed on the appropriate form designated for New Programs. If the particular program has never existed or if the program was inactivated, it is considered a new program. For example, an EPP has an approved program for a Master of Arts in Middle Level Education and desires to offer a Master of Arts in Secondary Education. Although the EPP has an approved program for the Middle School Level, the Secondary route would be considered a new program. Therefore, the EPP should follow the guidelines for a new program. Implementation Semester Deadline for Submission to MDE Initial Recommendation Made to EPP by MDE Licensure Commission Recommendation SBE Decision Fall February 15 March May July Spring June 15 August September November New Program Proposal Requirements The teacher education program approval process requires the following: • The EPP provides documentation of institutional administrative approval and/or Mississippi Institutions of Higher Learning approval, if public. • The program requires candidates to learn, apply and reflect upon Mississippi College and Career Readiness Standards. • The program is based upon and aligned to state and national program standards. • The program shall identify and meet appropriate licensure/certification requirements. • All degree programs shall meet the MS-IHL minimum core curriculum requirement to receive a baccalaureate degree (see Section V: Curriculum). To implement a new teacher or administrator preparation program, EPPs shall submit a letter of request from the EPP’s dean or vice president of academic affairs, and the appropriate form designated for New Programs, or include the MS-IHL proposal request submitted (if it fully addresses each MDE proposal section requirement) by the appropriate deadline. In addressing each section of the proposal, please be thorough and succinct. Where applicable, attach any EPP forms or guidelines provided the required information. The components of the proposal shall include a cover page and a contents page that outlines required sections. The cover page shall include the following information: • Institution • Name of Faculty Contact for Proposal • Faculty Contact Telephone and Email Address • Name of Program (Content Area) and Endorsement Code • Level of Program (e.g., Bachelor’s) • Date Proposal Submitted to MDE The contents page shall identify the following sections: I. Overview/Rationale II. Program Content III. Faculty IV. Comparison of two other programs V. Professional Accreditation VI. Support Documentation Process for New Program Approval The following steps shall be followed to present a new program to the Licensure Commission and/or SBE: 1. The EPP shall submit all required documentation for an initial review by MDE staff to ensure feasibility. 2. After the initial review, MDE disseminates the proposals to MDE program staff and EPP peer reviewers. 3. The MDE will compile all reviewers’ comments and recommendations and determine if the proposal is ready to be presented to the Licensure Commission. If there are concerns regarding a proposal, the EPP will be provided an opportunity to address the concerns and resubmit the amended proposal. 4. Once approved by the Division of Educator Preparation, the item is slated for a Licensure Commission meeting. 5. If approved by the Licensure Commission, the item moves forward to the SBE meeting for a final decision. 6. EPPs will be provided formal notification of final SBE decisions and the date for which program completers will be eligible to apply for licensure under the new program. Program Modification A program modification request should be initiated when a change substantive enough to alter the program is needed. An EPP seeking approval to modify an existing program shall email the Division of Educator Preparation to provide an overview of the modifications to the program, the rationale for making the proposed modifications, and evidence that the program has satisfied university protocol. Additionally, the EPP shall access the appropriate form designated for Program Modification and complete all applicable sections. Major modifications may be subject to peer review. Modification forms and supporting documents shall be uploaded into the EPP’s SharePoint folder. Program Modification Requirements The proposal shall include a cover page, and a content page for the required sections. The cover page shall include the following information: • Institution • Name of Faculty Contact for Proposal • Faculty Contact Telephone and Email Address • Name of Program (Content-Area) and Endorsement Code • Level of Program • Date of Submission to MDE The contents page shall identify the following sections: I. Overview/Rationale II. Program Content III. Faculty IV. Comparison of two other programs V. Professional Accreditation VI. Support Documentation All modifications to existing programs should be submitted to the Division of Educator Preparation for review and recommendation to the Licensure Commission. Although all program modifications are required to be submitted, only those that significantly impact a degree program or endorsement program will be presented for review and approval of the Licensure Commission and SBE. A list of courses required (i.e., advising or program sheets) to complete the program and a syllabus for each course shall be included with a request for approval of modifications. If a public (state funded) institution governed by the Board of Trustees of the State Institutions of Higher Learning is not required to submit the proposal initially to MS-IHL for approval (in a manner consistent with the Academic Guidelines posted on the MS-IHL website, Academic and Student Affairs downloads), include that evidence. If all MDE required proposal content is addressed in the proposal for MS-IHL, the EPP may elect to submit or duplicate the MS-IHL proposal and attach that documentation to MDE’s Modification Form for submission to MDE. Process for Program Modification Approval The following steps shall be followed to present a program modification to the Licensure Commission and/or SBE. 1. The EPP shall submit all required documentation for an initial review by MDE staff to ensure feasibility. 2. After the initial review, MDE disseminates the proposals to MDE program staff and EPP peer reviewers. 3. The MDE will compile all reviewers’ comments and recommendations and determine if the proposal is ready to be presented to the Licensure Commission. If there are concerns regarding a proposal, the EPP will be provided an opportunity to address the concerns and resubmit the amended proposal. 4. Once approved by the Division of Educator Preparation, the item is slated for a Licensure Commission meeting. 5. If approved by the Licensure Commission, the item moves forward to the SBE meeting for a final decision. 6. EPPs will be provided formal notification upon final SBE decisions and the date for which program completers will be eligible to apply for licensure under the modified program. Inactive Programs While the definition of “inactive program” is not stipulated in SBE rule, a program not listed on the institution’s website and/or included in their course catalog is generally determined to be an inactive program. EPPs are asked to remove inactive programs. This process is equivalent to a program deletion and should be documented through formal processes outlined in Section III of this document and approved by the Licensure Commission and SBE, thus removing from the MDE list of approved licensure programs. Additionally, inactive programs may be determined through program review processes. Section V: PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS Curriculum All educator preparation programs shall be appropriately accredited by the national accrediting body approved by the SBE and shall meet all Mississippi Department of Education standards to ensure program graduates are prepared with the skills and knowledge necessary for licensure with the Mississippi Department of Education. Traditional teacher licensure candidates shall satisfactorily complete required coursework that shall include instruction in three 3-hour courses: Classroom Management (CM) (per Miss. Code Ann. § 37-3-89), Special Education (SPED), and Data Analysis/Evaluation (DAE). Consistent with MS- IHL Policy 512, licensure core curriculum requirements for all programs consist of the following: English Composition 6 semester hours College Algebra, Quantitative Reasoning, or higher- level mathematics 3 semester hours Natural Science 6 semester hours Humanities and Fine Arts 9 semester hours Social or Behavioral Science 6 semester hours Science of Reading and Structured Literacy Standards Alignment To ensure licensure candidates are prepared with the skills and knowledge to effectively deliver literacy instruction grounded in the Science of Reading and Structured Literacy Practices as required in Miss. Codes Ann. § 37-177-1 and § 37-173-16 for professional educators, all literacy coursework in programs leading to licensure shall be aligned to the International Dyslexia Association’s 2018 Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading and the 2017 International Literacy Association’s Standards. Elementary Education Program of Study Interdisciplinary programs of study for elementary education teacher candidates shall include: English 12 semester hours Mathematics 9 semester hours Science 9 semester hours Social Studies 12 semester hours Fine Arts/Teaching of Fine Arts 3 semester hours Reading/Literacy Literacy I or Structured Literacy I, Literacy II or Structured Literacy II, Integrating Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum, and Diagnosing and Assessing Reading Difficulties 12 semester hours Special Education 3 semester hours Classroom Management 3 semester hours Data Analysis/Evaluation 3 semester hours Elementary Education teacher candidates seeking licensure in K-6 shall complete one 18-hour content area concentration and one twelve (12) hour reading endorsement. Secondary Subject Area Licensure Programs (7-12) In addition to an academic major in the subject area, or equivalent hours, candidates seeking licensure in grades 7-12 shall complete the following: English Composition 6 semester hours College Algebra, Quantitative Reasoning, or higher- level mathematics 3 semester hours Natural Science 6 semester hours Humanities and Fine Arts 9 semester hours Special Education 3 semester hours Classroom Management 3 semester hours Data Analysis/Evaluation 3 semester hours Reading Pedagogy/Structured Literacy 3 semester hours K-12 Subject Area Licensure Programs Candidates seeking licensure in grades K-12 (i.e., Art, Dance, Foreign Language, Music, PE) shall complete the following: English Composition 6 semester hours College Algebra, Quantitative Reasoning, or higher- level mathematics 3 semester hours Natural Science 6 semester hours Humanities and Fine Arts 9 semester hours Special Education 3 semester hours Classroom Management 3 semester hours Data Analysis/Evaluation 3 semester hours Discipline Pedagogy 3 semester hours Alternate Route Programs All non-traditional teacher licensure candidates shall satisfactorily complete required coursework that shall include instruction in three 3-hour courses: Classroom Management (CM) (per Miss. Code Ann. § 37-3-89), Special Education (SPED), and Data Analysis/Evaluation (DAE). Elementary Education K-6 non-traditional licensure shall include instruction in four 3-hour literacy courses: Literacy I or Structured Literacy I, Literacy II or Structured Literacy II, Integrating Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum, and Diagnosing and Assessing Reading Difficulties Student Teaching/Internships Student teaching and internships are the most important components of educator preparation programs. All programs leading to initial licensure shall include multiple opportunities for candidates to practice skills in field-based clinical settings. Clinical experiences should expose candidates to multiple opportunities to practice skills learned through coursework in actual school settings. Student Teaching General Requirements: • Candidates will be required to complete 12 weeks (60 full days) of student teaching. Placements may be virtual or face-to-face depending on the local context. • All placements shall be in a MDE accredited school. Nonpublic accredited schools can be accessed on the Accreditation Index webpage. • Cooperating (in-service) teachers shall have at least three years of effective teaching experiences and be recommended by the principal and/or the district’s Office of Human Resources. • University supervisors shall have at least three years of effective P-12 teaching experience. It is highly recommended that university supervisors are licensed educators. Supervisors are required to make at least four face-to-face/virtual visits during the student teaching semester. • The EPP shall provide documentation of EPP supervisor and cooperating teacher training in the administration of the EPP Statewide Common Assessments. • EPPs shall submit a copy of the syllabus for Student Teaching. • EPPs shall submit a student teaching placement report each semester. Administration Internship General Requirements: • Candidates shall be required to complete a minimum of 300 contact hours of internship. • All placements shall be in a MDE accredited school. • Mentors shall be active educational leaders within a building setting, have a minimum of a master’s degree in educational leadership, a minimum of three years of pertinent professional experience, and engage regularly during the internship. Mentors are selected collaboratively by the intern, a representative of the school and/or district, and program faculty. • University supervisors shall have at least three years of effective P-12 administrative experiences. It is highly recommended that supervisors are licensed administrators. Supervisors are required to make face-to-face/virtual visits during internship. • Internship shall require experiences in elementary, middle, and high school diverse settings. Evidence shall be provided. School Counseling Internship General Requirements: • Practicum is comprised of at least 100 contact hours completed over 10 weeks with 40 direct service hours. • Internship is comprised of at least 600 contact hours completed over two semesters with at least 240 hours direct service. • Mentors shall regularly engage during the internship and have a minimum of a master’s degree preferably in school counseling, relevant certifications and/or licenses, and a minimum of three years of pertinent professional experience. Mentors are selected collaboratively by the intern, a representative of the school and/or district, and EPP program faculty. • University supervisors shall have at least three years of effective counseling experiences. It is highly recommended that supervisors are licensed counselors. Supervisors are required to make face-to-face/virtual visits during internship. • Internship shall require experiences in elementary, middle, and high school diverse settings. Evidence shall be provided. Other Advanced Program Internship General Requirements: • Candidates shall be required to complete an internship. • All placements shall be in a MDE accredited school. • Mentors shall regularly engage during the internship and have a minimum of a master’s degree, relevant certifications and/or licenses, and a minimum of three years of pertinent professional experience. Mentors are selected collaboratively by the intern, a representative of the school and/or district, and EPP program faculty. • University supervisors shall have at least three years of effective P-12 teaching experience. It is highly recommended that university supervisors are licensed educators. Supervisors are required to make face-to-face/virtual visits during the internship semester. • Internship shall require experiences in diverse school settings at the level where licensure is being requested. Evidence shall be provided. Content Knowledge Tests In order to obtain a license to practice as an educator in the state of Mississippi, all prospective teachers, administrators, and instructional support personnel shall achieve Mississippi’s minimum qualifying passing score on the state’s required licensing assessment(s) as appropriate. Praxis information is posted on the Praxis Information page and at the ETS website. Information about the Foundations of Reading test preparation materials, test registration is available at Mississippi Foundations of Reading. Program Admittance and Exit Requirements Teacher Candidate Admittance Requirements Each applicant for entry into a teacher licensure program shall demonstrate minimum academic ability prior to being admitted to a teacher education program. For traditional and alternate route candidates these skills are: • completion of a minimum of 60-hours of course credit with a minimum 3.0 GPA on a 4.0 system; or • ACT 21 or SAT equivalent; or • qualifying passing score on the Praxis CORE. Teacher Candidate Exit Requirements All elementary, secondary, and special area teacher education candidates shall complete a teacher education program that is approved by the SBE and nationally accredited. Successful completion of a program is determined by the following criteria: 1. Candidate met program entrance requirements. 2. Candidate demonstrated proficiency on statewide common assessments for skills, knowledge, and dispositions. 3. Candidate successfully completed a clinical experience. a. Traditional candidate successfully completed a minimum of 12 weeks (60 full days) student teacher experience. b. Alternate route candidate successfully completed a full academic year as the teacher of record. Administrator Admittance Requirements Prior to being admitted to an educational leadership program, candidates shall submit a standard application packet that includes the following: • verification of minimum 2.75 GPA on last 60 hours; • copy of standard teaching license; • verification of at least three (3) years education experience completed prior to program entry, and • verification of background check. Administrator Exit Requirements Prior to completing an administration program, candidates shall have successfully completed a program that is nationally accredited and state approved program. These skills for traditional route candidates are: • Candidate met program entrance requirements. • Candidate completed statewide common assessments for skills, knowledge, and dispositions. • Candidate successfully completed internship requirements that included a minimum of 300 hours of internship in elementary, middle, and high school diverse settings. Section VI: GLOSSARY Academic Major - The actual major granted to a candidate. For Title II reporting, IHEs should choose the closest match to the academic major choices within the annual Title II Report template (see Title II User Manual, Glossary for more details). The list will include teacher education majors and some non- education majors. Academic Year (AY) - To remain consistent with annual reporting requirements to MDE and other agencies, the state defines an AY for institutions of higher learning as the period that includes the fall, spring, and summer semesters (e.g., fall 2018, spring 2019, summer 2019). The EPP shall be consistent with how it reports a year of data to MDE to ensure accurate statewide data comparisons. Note: For Title II HEA reports to the USDE, an AY is defined as 12 consecutive months, starting September 1 and ending August 31. Accreditation - (1) A process for assessing and enhancing academic and educational quality through voluntary peer review. The current national accrediting body is CAEP. (2) The decision rendered by CAEP when an EPP’s professional education unit meets CAEP’s standards and requirements. Admit GPA - The grade point average calculated for eligible admission into an educator preparation program. For undergraduate candidates, the admit GPA of 3.0 shall be based upon a minimum of 60 hours of credit. For Alternate Route candidates, the 3.0 GPA may be the total undergraduate GPA, or last 60 hours of credit (undergraduate or graduate credit). Admitted Candidates - For state reports, admitted candidates are individuals who are eligible and officially admitted into a teacher education program in a given semester or year, generally in the junior year; not to be confused with those listed as enrolled, which includes all candidates currently taking courses in the program from admission through to graduation. Approved EPP Program - Any Mississippi EPP licensure program which prepares candidates to enter a specific area of education (e.g., math education, special education, science education, administration, counseling, etc.) that is approved by both the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development and the Mississippi State Board of Education. Assessments - The term covers content tests, observations, projects or assignments, and surveys. Assessments and scoring guides are used by faculty to evaluate candidates and provide them with performance feedback. Assessments and scoring guides should address candidate knowledge, performance, and dispositions that are aligned with standards. Candidate - An individual engaged in the preparation process for professional education licensure/certification with an Educator Preparation Provider (EPP). CEEDAR (Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform) - A technical assistance program operating out of the University of Florida dedicated to reform, revise, refine, and realign evidence-based practices within multi-tiered systems of support by building the capacity of the state personnel preparation system. Cohort of Program Completers - Individuals who met all requirements of a Mississippi state-approved licensure program in a given academic year (See: program completer). Commission (or Licensure Commission) - Most commonly used to refer to the Commission on Teacher and Administrator Education, Certification and Licensure and Development that is the body charged through Miss. Ann. Code § 37- 3-2 with the responsibility of making recommendations to the Mississippi State Board of Education regarding standards for the preparation, licensure, and continuing professional development of those who teach or perform tasks of an educational nature in the public schools of the State of Mississippi. Content (Field of Study) - The subject matter or discipline that teachers are being prepared to teach at the elementary, middle, and/or secondary levels. Content also refers to the professional field of study (e.g., special education, early childhood education, school psychology, reading, or school administration). Content Area Courses - Refers to course work in the area of endorsement (e.g., mathematics, science, special education, etc.). Continuing Education Unit (CEU) - Unit of educational credit offered through an approved CEU granting agency. One CEU is earned through 10 contact hours of instruction/training. Core Curriculum - Core courses that are required by the state to be used in determining a teacher candidate’s GPA for admission into a teacher preparation program. These courses should be either a specific set pre-determined by EPP policy or a set of courses that the state recognizes as a common core of courses across major subject area. Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) - A national accrediting body that ensures the preparation of highly qualified educators through the accreditation of programs in which data-driven decisions; resources and practices support candidate learning; and candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions geared toward raising student achievement. Note: TEAC and NCATE merged to form CAEP. Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Coordinator - The person(s) identified by the EPP to manage preparations for the CAEP visit. Critical Shortage Subject Area - A subject area in which the state has determined a deficit of candidates to recruit, train, employ, and retain as highly qualified teachers in that subject. Historically these have been defined as: Special Education, Mathematics, Science (Biology, Chemistry, Physics) and Foreign Language (French, German, Spanish). Culturally Linguistically Responsive Pedagogy (CLRP) - A research-based approach that makes meaningful connections between what students learn in school and their cultures, languages, and life experiences. These connections help students access rigorous curriculum, develop higher-level academic skills, and see the relevance between what they learn at school and their lives. Cut Score - The minimum score required by the state to pass a teacher certification or licensure assessment. Cycle - A single collection of data over time (e.g., semester, year) Data - Information with a user and a use that may include individual facts, statistics, or items of information. Disaggregated Data - The process of breaking out aggregated data according to specific criteria in order to reveal patterns, trends, and other information. Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) - The college, school, department, or other administrative body in colleges, universities, or other organizations with the responsibility for managing or coordinating all programs offered for the initial and advanced preparation of teachers and other school professionals, regardless of where these programs are administratively housed in an institution. Also known as the “professional education unit.” The professional education unit shall include in its accreditation review all programs offered by the institution for the purpose of preparing teachers and other school professionals to work in pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade settings. Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) Head - The individual officially designated to provide leadership for the EPP (e.g., dean, director, or chair), with the authority and responsibility for its overall administration and operation. Endorsements - Areas in which educators are licensed. Enrolled - Includes students who have been officially admitted into a teacher preparation program and those who are still actively completing coursework required for graduation. Ethnicity - Physical and cultural characteristics that make a social group distinctive. These may include, but are not limited to national origin, ancestry, language, shared history, traditions, values, and symbols— all of which contribute to a sense of distinctiveness among members of the group. Evidence - A factual report or documentation of events that support meeting a standard or indicator. Formative Assessment - Evaluations based on rubrics designed to measure observable instructional and behavioral practices of an educator in training. Formative assessment is a method of continually evaluating student/candidate academic needs and development and precedes local benchmark assessments and summative assessments. High-Leverage Practices (HLP) - Best practice as identified by the Council for Exceptional Children. These are organized around four major components. • Collaboration • Assessment • Social/emotional/behavioral • Instruction High-Quality Instructional Materials (HQIM) - Materials that are aligned to the Mississippi College and Career Readiness Standards, externally validated, comprehensive and include knowledge-building complex texts, problems, and assessments. Inclusive Principal Leadership - Inclusive principals create strong school cultures and distribute leadership across staff to serve all learners well and ensure all students feel safe, supported, and valued in school. In promoting equity for “all,” inclusive principals must respond effectively to the potential and needs of each student. Inclusive principals ensure high expectations and appropriate supports so that each student – across race, gender, ethnicity, language, disability, sexual orientation, family background, and/or family income – can excel in school. Indicator - The smallest category, measure, or gauge of an observable descriptor that provides data and information regarding a specific goal or point. Institutional Standards - Standards set by an Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) that reflect its mission and identify important expectations for educator candidate learning that may be unique to EPP. Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) - Section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act (Title II) provides a general definition of an “institution of higher education,” as follows: For purposes of this Act, other than Title IV [Student Financial Assistance], the term institution of higher education means an educational institution in any State that: 1. admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate, or persons who meet the requirements of Section 484(d)(3); 2. is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education; 3. provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor’s degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or awards a degree that is acceptable for admission to a graduate or professional degree program, subject to review and approval by the Secretary; 4. is a public or other nonprofit institution; and 5. is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted pre-accreditation status by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the granting of pre-accreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is a satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time. Section 101(b) defines additional institutions that are included: “For purposes of this Act, other than Title IV, the term Institution of higher education” also includes: 1. any school that provides not less than a 1-year program of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation and that meets the provision of paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subsection (a); and 2. a public or nonprofit private educational institution in any State that, in lieu of the requirements in subsection (a)(1), admits as regular students, individuals— a. who are beyond the age of compulsory school attendance in the State in which the institution is located; or b. who will be dually or concurrently enrolled in the institution and a secondary school. Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) - The constitutional governing body responsible for policy and financial oversight of the eight public institutions of higher learning in the state of Mississippi. Public EPPs in Mississippi are often referred to as IHLs. Knowledge Base - Empirical research, disciplined inquiry, informed theory, and the wisdom of practice that serves as the basis for requirements, decisions, and actions of an Educator Preparation Provider (EPP). Licensure - The official recognition by a state governmental agency that grants professional recognition to an individual who meets specified qualifications/requirements. Literacy - The ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, compute, and communicate using visual, audible, and digital materials across disciplines and in any context. Literacy (Reading) - Instructional strategies to support explicit, systematic, and sequential approaches to teaching phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. Strategies shall also include effective methods for identifying characteristics of conditions such as dyslexia and the use of multisensory interventions. Measures - The variety of observation and assessment tools and methods that are collected as part of a research effort. Mississippi Association for Colleges of Teacher Education (MACTE) - MACTE is an organization comprised of the deans and/or designees of education for public and private universities and colleges in the state of Mississippi. MACTE is a state chapter of the American Association for Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE). MECCA - Mississippi Educator Career Continuum Archive is a customized cloud- based, all-in-one, single sign-on educator workforce information management system that serves as a hub to capture the lifecycle of a Mississippi educator from recruitment to retirement. Mississippi State Board of Education (SBE) - The Mississippi State Board of Education is made up of nine members appointed according to the rules in the Mississippi Constitution. The Board appoints the State Superintendent of Education, sets public education policy and oversees the Mississippi Department of Education. Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) - The state education agency for the state of Mississippi. The State Board of Education is the governing body for policies of MDE. Mississippi Educator Preparation Provider Annual Report - To satisfy annual program approval of EPPs, MDE requests a state review process for educator preparation program approval that requires reporting of specific data by April 30. Mississippi Mid-Cycle Program Review - Is the state’s review process conducted at the mid-point of an EPP’s national accreditation cycle. The review is designed ensure Mississippi educator preparation programs meet state and national standards as well as the needs of local schools in preparing competent, caring, and qualified teachers and leaders capable of impacting P-12 student learning outcomes. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) - Is an independent, nonprofit organization working to advance accomplished teaching for all students. PK–12 School Personnel - Licensed practitioners in PK–12 schools who provide instruction, supervision, and direction for candidates during field-based assignments (See: Professional Education Faculty and School Faculty). Part-Time Faculty - Professional education faculty who have less than a full-time assignment in the professional education unit. Some part-time faculty are full-time employees of the college or university with a portion of their assignments in the professional education unit. Other part-time faculty are not full-time employees of the institution and are commonly considered adjunct faculty. Pass Rate - The percentage of students who passed assessment(s) taken for initial certification or licensure in the field of preparation. Professional Development - Opportunities for educators to develop new knowledge and skills through professional learning activities and events such as in-service education, conference attendance, sabbatical leave, summer leave, intra- and inter- institutional visitations, fellowships, and work in PK–12 schools. Program Review – Mississippi Code Ann. § 37-101-29 mandates that education degree programs that lead to licensure be approved by the Mississippi State Board of Education. The program review process is conducted by the Division of Education Preparation. Standards are approved by the Licensure Commission and SBE. Reliability - The degree to which test scores for a group of test takers are consistent over repeated request for evaluations of a measurement procedure and hence are inferred to be dependable and repeatable for an individual test taker. A measure is said to have a high reliability if it produces consistent results under consistent conditions. Scaled Score - A scaled score is a conversion of a student's raw score on a test or a version of the test to a common scale that allows for a numerical comparison between students. Because most major testing programs use multiple versions of a test, the scale is used to control slight variations from one version of a test to the next. Scaled scores are particularly useful for comparing test scores over time, such as measuring semester- to-semester and year-to-year growth of individual students or groups of students in a content area. However, within the same test, different content areas are typically on different scales, so a scaled score of 24 in Mathematics may not mean the same as a scaled score of 24 in Reading. Self-Study Report (SSR) - The document that an Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) creates following its internal self-study, that assembles evidence demonstrating its case for CAEP Standards. Single Assessment Pass Rate - The percentage of students who passed the assessment among all who took the assessment. Site Review - The two-to-three days in which site reviewers conduct their summative review of an Educator Preparation Provider’s (EPP) self-study report and evidence on location at the EPP’s campus or organizational headquarters. Specialized Professional Association (SPA) - A member of CAEP that is a national organization of teachers, professional education faculty, and/or other school professionals who teach a specific content area (e.g., mathematics or social studies), teach students at a specific developmental level (i.e., early childhood, elementary, middle level, or secondary), teach students with specific needs (e.g., special education teachers), or provide services to students (e.g., school counselors, school psychologists, or principals). EPPs may elect to have SPAs review programs for national recognition. Stakeholder - Partners, organizations, businesses, community groups, agencies, schools, districts, and/or EPPs interested in candidate preparation or education. Standards - Normative statements about educator preparation providers (EPPs) and educator candidate practices, performances, and outcomes that are the basis for an accreditation review. Standards are written in broad terms with components that further explicate their meaning. Student - A learner in a P-12 school setting or other structured learning environment but not a learner in an educator preparation program. Student Teaching - Extensive and substantive clinical practice in P-12 schools for candidates preparing to teach. Subject Area - A division of organized knowledge for which state curriculum guidelines have been prepared; the area in which candidates are prepared to teach. For Title II reporting, IHEs should choose the subject area that best describes the area the candidate is prepared (see Title II User Manual, Glossary for more details). For state reporting, IHEs should choose from the list of licensure areas provided by the state. Summary Pass Rate - The percentage of students who passed all tests they took for their area of specialization among those who took one or more tests in their specialization areas. Summative Assessment – Assessment that occurs at the conclusion or end point of a course or program to determine whether candidate learning outcomes have been achieved. Supervised Clinical Experience - A series of supervised field experiences (including student teaching) with P-12 students that occur as a sequenced, integral part of the preparation program prior to the candidate becoming the teacher of record. Please note that Title II, Section 202 (d)(2) describes features of clinical experience. Courses in the curriculum that include the activities described in 202(d)(2) may be considered clinical coursework. The curriculum policies of each state and its institutions will identify coursework that is clinical and nonclinical. Supervising Faculty - All persons the institution regards as having faculty status, who were assigned by the teacher preparation program to provide supervision and evaluation of student teaching, and who have an administrative link or relationship to the teacher preparation program. Supplemental Teaching Endorsement - Areas of endorsement added to a valid five- year or three-year license by: 1. completing 18 hours in a content area with a grade of “C” or higher; or 2. an institutional program verification documenting completion of a state approved program in an additional content; or 3. meeting the minimum score on the Praxis II Specialty Area Test; or 4. completing an MDE approved program. Teacher Candidates - Individuals admitted to, or enrolled in, programs for the initial preparation of teachers. Candidates are distinguished from “students” in P‐12 schools. The term “students” refers to learners in the P‐12 environment. Teaching Experience - Experience accrued by a properly licensed staff member in a grade or subject under legal contract to an accredited public, private, elementary, or secondary (P-12) school; or teaching/administrative experience accrued at a state approved or regionally/nationally accredited EPP program. Technology - The tools and techniques available through computers, the Internet, telecommunications, and multimedia that are used by educator preparation providers (EPPs) for instruction and the input, storing, processing, and analyzing of data in quality assurance systems. Educator candidates should be able to demonstrate that they use technology to work effectively with students to support student learning. Validity - The extent to which a set of operations, test, or other assessment measures what it is supposed to measure. Validity is not a property of a data set but refers to the appropriateness of inferences from test scores or other forms of assessment and the credibility of the interpretations that are made concerning the findings of a measurement effort.