spanish-american institute

215 West 43 Street  ●  NYC, NY 10036  ●  212.840.7111  ●  fax: 212.719.5922  ●  www.sai2000.org  ●  info@sai2000.org   http://www.facebook.com/studentclub

 

Text Box: 6CEA

Program Development, Planning and Review

Standing Committee on

Student Achievement

 

To:      Members, Program Development, Planning and Review Standing Committee on  Student Achievement

~       

 

Responsible Parties:

From:  Dante V. Ferraro, Coordinator, Program Development, Planning and Review Coordinator

Re:      Charge to Program Development, Planning and Review Standing Committee on Student Achievement

Date:   April 30, 2013

cc:       Other Standard Area Committees

            All Faculty and Staff

 

The Standing Committee n Student Achievement of the overall Program Development, Planning and Review Plan is responsible for the Student Achievement section of the CEA Standards for the English-Plus Course of Study.  CEA states that this is the most scrutinized and most critical section, “the heart of the English” program (p. 39, Accreditation Standards). 

 

Programs must demonstrate to CEA that they:

·        have established student learning outcomes that can be measured and documented.

·        have implemented the measurement of student learning outcomes to move students progressively from one level to another,

·        determine levels of satisfactory progress for each student at each level that represent significant outcomes within the norms of English language programs,

·        utilize valid and reliable assessment tools and systems,

·        describe and publicize (in writing to each student) the student outcomes needed to move from one level to another, and

·        demonstrate and document whether students achieve these outcomes for each course and each level (see further, pp. 39-40). 

 

CEA expects that programs will have the following components in place: 

 

“Good Practice” Standards: CEA constantly refers in its Accreditation Standards to “good practice” standards.  This is code for common understandings in education that need not be stated because they are understood or normed to standards set by professional organizations and others representing the profession. 

 

For example, the National League of Nursing sets standards for all nursing programs in the country which it measures through required national exams for all nursing practitioners.  Likewise, TESOL and ETS, among others, define good practice standards and learning outcomes measures for ESL for each level of ESL teaching and learning. 

 

The four sections below:  

 

I.       Tasks, Process, Responsible Parties, Timelines, Documentation and Assessment/Measurement

The Program Development, Planning and Review Plan establishes the following timelines for Standing Committee on Student Achievement activity: 

  Timelines

Tasks - Process - Responsible Parties

Status

Documentation / Measurement / Assessment

April 2013

President Ferraro, Coordinator, will invite Student Achievement Standing Committee Members to serve by personal meeting.

Committee nominees will accept or decline the assignment orally.

Committee members will plan for the first meeting to review assigned standards, review guiding questions, define needed documentation, and develop work plan.

Completed

·                    Committee Charge Memo

·                    TESOL Program Self-Study Instrument

·                    Placement Test CELSA Results

·                    MyLab Initial  and Exit Exam Results

·                    Rubrics

·                    Syllabi

·                    Student Progress Notices

·                    surveys and Survey Results and Analysis

·                    School Catalog

May 2013

 

President Ferraro, Coordinator will develop and distribute the "Committee Charge" in consultation with Deans Davis, Schiffman and Schwenke.

The Student Achievement Committee will hold its first meeting to review assigned standards, review guiding questions, define needed documentation, and advance the work plan.

In Process

June 2013

The Second Student Achievement Standing Committee Meeting will to draft preliminary responses to overall Program Development, Planning and Review plan as well as the proposed responses to CEA October 2013 Required Reports by July 1, 2013.

 

To Be Completed

On or Before July 30, 2013

Dean Davis will summarize the Standing Committee on Student Achievement's draft responses and submit to Dante V. Ferraro, Coordinator for final re-write.

To Be Completed

October 1, 2013

President Ferraro, Coordinator, will assure submission of required CEA October 2013 Reports.

To Be Completed

December 2013 

Standing Committee Responsible Parties (listed above) or their successors, will evaluate elements of the TESOL Self-Review Instrument, consider revisions, deletions and additions to Student Achievement components of the overall Program Planning, Development and Review Plan.

Ongoing

April 2014

The Standing Committee on Student Achievement (consisting of responsible parties listed above or their successors) will repeat the Program Planning, Development and Review cycle of activities for Student Achievement described above.

Ongoing

 

 

II.  CEA Standards:  Student Achievement

The following Standards must be considered by the Program Development, Planning and Review Plan Standing Committee on Student Achievement.  Each Standard below is followed by a brief summary, illustration, and/or excerpt from CEA’s Discussion for that Standard and page references for further review in the CEA Standards document.  

 

CEA Standards of course reinforce and tie back to each other.  For example, Student Achievement and Curriculum Standards Curriculum must align.  There is a direct link between Student Achievement which measures outcomes and Curriculum which defines outcomes.  While the Curriculum Standards Committee is responsible for that portion of the overall Program Development, Planning and Review Plan and October 2013 CEA Reports, the Self-Study Coordinator and the Chairs who work with or serve on both Committees will help align the work of the two Committees. 

 

Student Achievement Standard 1:  The program or language institution has a placement system  . . . that allows valid and reliable placement of student into level [emphasis added].  .    

 

CEA Discussion:  Must insure that students are placed into levels on the basis of consistent, reliable, and valid measures of proficiency.  Must demonstrate how the placement measurements and procedures meet the standard of valid placement.  Must describe the “curricular link” between placement testing, language ability, and course placement.  (pp. 40-41)

 

Student Achievement Standard 2 :  The program or language institution documents in writing whether students are ready to progress to the next level or to exit the program of study, using instruments or procedures that appropriately assess the achievement of student learning outcomes for courses taken within the curriculum.  [emphasis added].

 

CEA Discussion:  The emphasis here is upon documented alignment—of course objectives, of placement, and of student progression. Student progress must be based on concrete evidence typically demonstrated by multiple means of assessment.  Means of assessment include indicators such as:  standardized exams, comprehensive exams, portfolios, rubrics, scales, etc.   (p. 41). 

 

Student Achievement Standard 3 :  The program or language institution maintains and provides students with written reports that clearly indicate levels of language proficiency attained as a result of instruction. 

 

CEA Discussion:  “The intent of this standards is to ensure that written student reports focus on attained language proficiency. “  The written report must include an indication of the extent to which a student has mastered the course requirements.  It must also include a proficiency scale with descriptors for each cause within each level “written in terms of describable and measurable student outcomes.  The reporting system must include course proficiency levels, a proficiency scale, and an interpretation of the scale.  This may be stated in an individual student report or elsewhere such as on a syllabus.   

 

Proficiency is defined as the degree to which the nonnative speaker has achieved describable and measureable competencies using the English language.  Grades alone are not sufficient to establish this (pp. 42-43).

 

Student Achievement Standard 4 : The program or language institution informs students of the assessment procedures used to determine placement, progressions from level to level, and completion of the program, as well as their individual results.  .

 

CEA Discussion:  Requires evidence of valid and reliable evaluation of student language proficiency at all stages of a student’s program of study (pp. 43).  Includes providing students in writing with a statement of course objectives, expected student outcomes, and procedures for promotion to the next level.   Promotion to the next level must be based solely on demonstrated mastery of the previous course’s stated learning objectives using a valid measurable form of assessment.

 

III.  Some Guiding Questions or Prompts for Committee Consideration

 

1.     Student Achievement Standard 1 : What is the current admissions placement system?  Is it normed to course outcomes?  What determines its validity? 

2.     Student Achievement Standard 2 : What instruments or other measures are used to measure student learning outcomes in ESL-Plus courses as a basis for progressing to the next level?  How do we demonstrate to students, to ourselves, and to others that students have mastered the stated learning objectives for each course and level? How do we demonstrate to students, to ourselves, and to others that students have mastered the stated learning objectives for each course and level? 

3.     Student Achievement Standards 3 and 4 :  What are the proficiency levels for each ESL-Plus course?  proficiency scales?  Where are they stated?  How are students informed of their current proficiency level?  of the proficiency needed to move to the next level?  to exit the course or program? 

4.     Program Development, Planning and Review Standards 1 and 2:  Does this year's Program Development, Planning and Review schedule include:

·        Tasks

·        Process

·        Responsible Parties

·        Timelines

·        Documentation and

·        Assessments and Measurements?

 

IV.     Citations from CEA October 2013 Required Reports To Be Considered By The Standing Committee of Student Achievement of the Program Planning, Development and Review Plan