Standard 1 and A.1

The provider ensures that candidates develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their discipline and, by completion, are able to use discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career-readiness standards.

SUMMARY

Aligned with CAEP Standard 1, the VCU EPP initial licensure programs aim to prepare effective educators with a deep understanding of critical concepts and principles of their discipline and the skills to implement discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career-readiness standards. VCU EPP initial programs prepare candidates for their role as educators through a series of course- and clinical-based experiences aligned with the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium standards (InTASC), CAEP and Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) Approved Teacher Education Programs Compliance - Accountability Measurements.

EXAMPLES OF EXCELLENCE IN PRACTICE

• Candidates demonstrate growth and competency on InTASC and CAEP Standards
  1. All initial licensure programs use longitudinal and developmental rubrics aligned to CAEP and InTASC teaching professional standards. Rubrics are applied mid-program and during the culminating student teaching experience.
  2. Assessment findings indicate candidates develop from Beginning and Acceptable levels at mid-program to Acceptable, approaching Target, levels at program completion.
• Candidates demonstrate content and pedagogical content knowledge
  1. Initial candidates receive content knowledge preparation through completion of an appropriate major in the College of Humanities and Sciences (or its equivalent if admitted after earning a baccalaureate degree), as well as general studies coursework.
  2. Each licensure content area aligns to the VDOE Regulations Governing the Review and Approval of Education Programs in Virginia for that licensure area as reflected in curriculum matrices, and all initial programs are approved by the VDOE.
  3. All programs exceed the state benchmark pass rate on applicable assessments of content knowledge (range= 91.3-100%).

IMPROVEMENTS EMERGING FROM THE SELF-STUDY

• Faculty identified an opportunity to enhance instruction on technology integration in the elementary and secondary programs. The EPP introduced a new course, TEDU 510, in fall 2018. Special Education, Music, and Arts programs incorporate technology integration instruction in methods or technology courses unique to the program.
• Guided by the Virginia Department of Education resources, programs enhanced the emphasis on college- and career- readiness standards for all P-12 students.
• All initial licensure programs updated curriculum matrices ensuring program alignments to new 2018-approved VDOE Regulations.

The VCU Education Preparation Provider maintains a strong record of excellence for professional educators. The EPP initial licensure programs aim to prepare effective educators with a deep understanding of critical concepts and principles of their discipline and the skills to implement discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career- ready standards. VCU EPP initial programs prepare candidates for their role as educators through a series of course- and clinical- based experiences aligned with the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium Standards (InTASC) and CAEP Standards (1). For state review, program curricula also align to the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) Approved Teacher Education Programs Compliance - Accountability Measurements (1, 7). The EPP seeks to prepare candidates who know their specialized content, technology, and pedagogical content and demonstrate the ability to effectively use it to create differentiated and meaningful learning opportunities for all students. Self-study evidence indicates candidates meet, or exceed acceptable levels on multiple measures at exit, confirming readiness for entry to the profession.

Standard 1 Data Sources

Candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions are assessed through multiple measures as candidates progress through the program (85.1; 85.2). The key EPP-created assessments include 1) mid-program assessment of lesson planning, 2) mid-program assessment of dispositions, and 3) the culminating assessment in student teaching called the Clinical Evaluation Continuum. Initial licensure programs employ the Clinical Evaluation Continuum rubric, adapted from the Santa Cruz New Teacher Model, to assess and monitor candidate learning and development throughout the program. Aligned to CAEP and InTASC Standards, the Clinical Evaluation Continuum (CEC) includes six sections, or standards, each with a series of key elements: (1) Creating and Maintaining a Positive and Safe Learning Environment, (2) Planning for Instruction, (3) Engaging and Supporting Students in Learning, (4) Assessing Student Learning, (5) Developing as a Professional, (6) Advocating for Social Justice and Equity and Developing Family and Community Relationships.

For the mid-program assessment of lesson planning, candidates are formatively assessed on section two of the Clinical Evaluation Continuum (CEC), "Planning for Instruction", of the CEC rubric. For the mid-program assessment of dispositions, candidates are formatively assessed using section five, "Developing as a Professional". During student teaching, both the Cooperating Teacher and University Supervisor assess the candidate at mid-/first placement and at final/second placement. The final/second placement assessment is the summative program assessment of candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Application of a longitudinal and developmental rubric supports shared understanding for the candidate on professional expectations of a beginning teacher and supports monitoring of candidate growth and progression in knowledge, skills, and dispositions through the program.

Candidates are evaluated on each key element on a scale of 0 (unacceptable) to six (target). Scores of 1-2 may be given for candidates at the beginning level, 3-4 for those at the acceptable level, and 5-6 for those at the target level. Candidates who reach the beginning level based on coursework and practicum experiences prior to the internship or externship successfully meet expectations. Although candidates at the target level have successfully shown characteristics of an accomplished teacher, they have not reached the full level of an accomplished teacher. The guidance documents (86.1; 86.2; 86.3) for these EPP-created mid- and final- program assessments detail the development of the measure and the methods employed to investigate evidence for reliability and validity. In brief, key efforts to establish reliability and validity for the EPP common assessment rubrics include: Content Validity (expert development, alignment to standards, Content Validity Index ratings by P-12 partners), and Internal Consistency (Cronbach's alpha). The EPP confirms the CEC rubric and associated mid-program assessments of Lesson Planning and Dispositions, meet or exceed the sufficiency criteria as detailed in the CAEP Evaluation Framework for EPP-Created Assessments (85.2).

In addition to the longitudinal assessments using the EPP-created CEC during the program, the EPP employs self-assessments, licensure examinations, and state statutory requirements to monitor candidate progression and readiness for practice. A few examples include: candidate self-assessment of dispositions at admission to teacher preparation, GPA monitoring at admission to teacher preparation and to clinical, Principal Survey Evaluation of VCU Student Teaching Interns, Praxis II subject examinations, RVE/VRA for elementary and special education, child abuse and dyxlesia training. The initial licensure assessment plan (85.1) organizes the EPP-created and proprietary assessments by gates. Measures in the plan are used as evidence to demonstrate candidate proficiencies on state, InTASC, and CAEP Standards; the data quality map details evidence for reliability and validity for each measure (85.2). Throughout Standard 1, data for programs with fewer than ten candidates are reported "blind" in the evidence tables with n<10 to blind the mean and standard deviation; program-level data can be made available on-site.

1.1 Understanding of InTASC Standards

The ten InTASC Standards articulate four categories that convey the expected knowledge and ability of beginning educators related to: (1) learner and learning, (2) content, (3) instructional practice, and (4) professional responsibility. As candidates progress through their initial licensure program, they engage in scaffolded curricular experiences that introduce and reinforce content aligned to the InTASC Standards (1), which lead to opportunities to practice and demonstrate competency in clinical experiences. Throughout the program, VCU EPP employs both formative and summative measures (85.1; 85.2) to assess candidate mastery of knowledge, skills, and dispositions in relation to the InTASC Standards, including mid-program lesson planning and content knowledge assessments, Praxis II licensure content assessments, and clinical performance data.

InTASC Standards 1, 2, and 3: The learner and learning

EPP coursework exposes candidates to content related to learner and learning (InTASC Standards 1, 2, and 3), providing opportunities to focus on learner development, learner differences, and learning environments. InTASC alignment charts detail the specific courses and experiences by program. For example, through a shared set of courses (TEDU 562, EDUS 301, EDUS 617, TEDU 537, TEDU 681, TEDU 545), secondary programs teach candidates about learner development and learner differences, guiding candidates to consider how different backgrounds, abilities, and language proficiencies relate to learning. Further, secondary students develop plans aligned to Universal Design for Learning where planning includes consideration to development and differences in designing the environment and lesson, including presentation, discipline, technology, strategies, etc.

Evidence of candidate abilities to apply their understanding of learning and learners in instructional settings derives from both the mid-program lesson plan and dispositions and final CEC. All candidates develop a lesson plan that requires they select goals, learning sequences and adjustment strategies consistent with students' development and designed to make learning accessible to all students. Data indicate candidates demonstrate, on average, Acceptable performance at program mid-point on these rubric indicators (2.1, 2.2, 2.3). Similarly, mid-program assessment of dispositions related to InTASC Learner and Learning suggest candidates' recognition of social contexts and importance of the learning environment with average scores at Acceptable approaching Target (2.1, 2.2, 2.3). The CEC guides structured observation and assessment of candidate proficiency in InTASC category Learner and Learning, including items derived from the all six standards on the rubric. Items from CEC Standard 2, applied also at mid-point, reflect growth at program completion compared to midpoint with average scores at Target. Overall, final clinical evaluation on items aligned to InTASC Standards 1, 2, and 3 reflect Target performance, on average, with only select items at the high end of Acceptable. Of note, Standard 6 indicators were recently introduced to the CEC in the 2016 revision to emphasize the school's mission related to social justice and serving high-need schools. The items are still in pilot stages of implementation and analysis as cooperating professionals and program faculty unpack what each of these elements looks like in practice for a student teacher.

InTASC Standards 4 and 5: Content

Initial candidates receive content knowledge preparation through completion of an appropriate major in the College of Humanities and Sciences (or its equivalent if admitted after earning a baccalaureate degree), as well as general studies coursework. VCU EPP assesses depth of content knowledge by monitoring GPA at admission to teacher preparation and admission to clinical experience, EPP-created assessments, and licensure assessments (85.1, appendices). Annual GPA audits indicate all programs meet or exceed the gate minimums for cohort GPA averages (52). All initial candidates are required to earn a passing score on the PRAXIS II as a requirement for admission to clinical experience. All (100%) candidates in all applicable programs passed the Praxis Subject Assessment (4).

In the absence of a special education Praxis II assessment, VCU EPP special education programs monitor content knowledge using EPP-created program assessments. The Special Education General Curriculum program developed a comprehensive examination with alignment to the Council for Exceptional Children, InTASC, and CAEP Standards. The measure was reviewed for content validity by content experts and P-12 partners, to assess content knowledge on both theories and practice in special education. In addition, EPP staff conducted item analyses to explore item discrimination and difficulty. Candidates must score a minimum of 80% to pass the examination prior to graduation. For three data cycles, 100% of candidates met or exceeded the 80% criterion (5). The Early Childhood Special Education program also employs a comprehensive examination, recently developed and implemented in spring 2020. Faculty ensure content validity through expert item development and alignment to program course content, InTASC, and CAEP standards. Spring 2020 pilot data indicated the need for a review guide for candidates. 100% (n=2) of summer 2020 ECSE completers met or exceeded the 80% benchmark (5). Lastly, the Special Education Adapted/Severe Disabilities Curriculum program employs two course-based assessments, reviewed by the Council for Exceptional Children SPA facilitated by the consortium hosting institution, George Mason University. Candidates met or exceeded expectations for all rubric items for each of the two course-based assessments: (1) Individualized Education Program (IEP) and (2) Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plan (FBA/BIP) (5). Additional detail for each content assessment and its evidence for data quality can be reviewed in the associated guidance document (5).

Further, in addition to these summative assessments of content knowledge, all initial candidates demonstrate content knowledge (InTASC 4) and application of content and pedagogical content (InTASC 5) through the CEC and lesson plan. Candidates' average performance suggests growth in these skills (e.g., knowledge of subject matter content, selecting learning goals aligned to standards, organizing instruction to support student understanding of content) from mid-program lesson plan to student teaching, indicating development from an average performance rating of Acceptable at mid-program to an average at Target performance by final assessment. Further, all initial candidates complete at least one practicum to develop pedagogical content knowledge and must pass this before proceeding through the curriculum.

InTASC Standards 6, 7, and 8: Instructional Practice

Through courses and clinicals (1), candidates learn and practice instruction, which includes Planning (InTASC 7), Design (InTASC 8), and Assessment (InTASC 6). Coursework emphasizes candidate planning and use of evidence-based instructional strategies as well as exposure to varied formative and summative assessment techniques. As noted for The Learner and Learning, candidates demonstrate growth and proficiency in planning between mid-program assessment at Acceptable levels to final clinical experience assessment at Target levels, on average.

Initial candidate pre-service impact on student learning is assessed by the University Supervisor and school site principal. Data indicates candidates provide evidence of a positive impact on student growth and/or learning. These findings are corroborated by evaluation of the student intern by the school placement principal with recent data indicating candidates demonstrate Acceptable, approaching Target, performance (6).

InTASC Standards 9 and 10: Professional Responsibility

VCU EPP introduces professional dispositions (InTASC 9) to initial licensure candidates at admission to teacher preparation by inviting them to self-assess their disposition prior to the program. Professionalism and ethical standards, as well as personal integrity, are addressed in EDUS 617 Advanced Ed Psych; EDUS 673 Democracy, Equity, and Ethics in Education; MUED 380 Intro to Music Ed; and SEDP 630 Legal Issues and Trends in Special Ed. All initial programs require a mid-program assessment prior to clinical placement, and all programs assess dispositions during clinical placement (85.1). Candidates reflect dispositions in working with others, exhibit commitment to the professional standards and chosen professional role, demonstrate behaviors consistent with the idea of fairness and the belief that all students can learn, and create positive learning environments. Mid-program dispositions assessment mirrors CEC Standard 5 assessed summatively in the final clinical experience. On average, EPP data for 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 indicate candidates develop from Acceptable ratings at mid-point to Target ratings on all items at program completion. Further, Collaborative Reflection Log and Plan for Reflective Growth used by the US assist candidates with developing plans to adjust their behavior and/or dispositions. Additional items assessed in student teaching provide evidence of candidates' ethic of caring and rapport with students with EPP mean scores at Target for the last three cycles. Proficiency in leadership and collaboration (InTASC 10) is evidenced by candidates during student teaching where they demonstrate communication, coordination, and collaboration with students, colleagues, and families, with trend data indicating mean EPP scores at Acceptable or Target levels for all items for 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20.

1.2 Use of research and evidence

VCU candidates use research and evidence to develop an understanding of the teaching profession and to measure their P-12 students' progress and professional practice as articulated in CAEP component 1.2. Candidates practice selecting and implementing formative and summative assessments, as well as analyzing and synthesizing assessment findings, in student teaching. Further, candidates use assessment findings to reflect on their own practice and to guide subsequent planning and instruction. Candidates reflect on practice throughout coursework in the program by using the Plan for Reflective Growth and Collaborative Reflection Log completed during student teaching in partnership with the Cooperating Teacher and University Supervisor. Candidates are assessed in student teaching on items aligned to CAEP component 1.2, including candidates' reflective practice, implementation of research-based strategies, use of data, and response to diversity in the classroom. For these items, candidates demonstrate Acceptable or Target performance, on average, on all CEC rubric items for the last three data cycles.

1.3 Application of content and pedagogical knowledge

CAEP 1.3 focuses on the application of a candidate's content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in outcome assessments. Since SPAs are not required in Virginia, the EPP will address state data as evidence (4). VCU EPP ensures candidates apply content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in outcome assessments in response to the Virginia Department of Education Board of Education Regulations Governing the Review and Approval of Education Programs in Virginia for each licensure content area. All initial programs are approved by the VDOE, demonstrating evidence to meet the VDOE Approved Teacher Education Programs Compliance - Accountability Measurements (9). Each licensure content area aligns to the VDOE Regulations for that licensure area as reflected in curriculum matrices (7). The Commonwealth of Virginia approved new VDOE Regulations in summer 2018; program faculty are actively engaged in updating curriculum, as appropriate, to reflect alignment to the new regulations and submit evidence of these alignments in summer 2020. Also, at the initial level, the Visual Arts P-12 and Music Education Vocal and Instrumental programs are accredited by their professional accreditors, NASAD, and NASM (8).

All initial candidates are required to earn a passing score on the PRAXIS II content exam as a requirement for admission to clinical experience. The SY2017-19 VDOE Biennial Report (4), based on six-semester cycles (fall, spring, summer) of completers, details the VCU EPP's most recently reported outcomes on VDOE's Accountability Measure 1 regarding candidate progress and performance on prescribed licensure assessments, demonstrating all programs exceed the state benchmark pass rate of 80% on applicable assessments of content knowledge. Reliability and validity evidence for these proprietary measures is reported in the data quality map (85.2) and in CAEP Table 7.

As demonstrated, 100% of candidates in all applicable programs passed the Praxis Subject Assessment including: Elementary Education P-12, Visual Arts P-12, Music Education - Instrumental P-12, Music Education - Vocal/Choral P-12, English, History and Social Sciences, Mathematics, Science - Chemistry. The VA state pass rate average was 99.1%.

For the VCLA assessment, 100% of candidates in the following programs passed: Elementary Education P-12, Visual Arts P-12, Music Education - Instrumental P-12, Music Education - Vocal/Choral P-12, English, History and Social Sciences, Mathematics, Science - Chemistry, and Special Education - Adapted Curriculum K-12 (Severe Disabilities). For Special Education - General Curriculum K-12, 91.3% (42/46) passed VCLA. The VA state pass rate average was 99.3%.

Three programs also require candidates pass the VRA/RVE assessment, and each program exceeded the state pass rate benchmark of 80%: Elementary (100%), Special Education General (93.5%, 43/46). The VA state pass rate average was 98.6%.

1.4 College and Career-Ready Standards

Aligned to CAEP component 1.4, programs provide candidates with exposure to diversity, college- and career-ready standards, and opportunities to develop proficiencies associated with the design and implementation of college- and career-ready teaching (1). All initial programs require candidates develop lesson and unit plans aligned to relevant state standards (e.g., Virginia Foundation Blocks of Learning for early childhood, Virginia Standards of Learning) in both coursework and clinical experiences. Candidates are exposed to resources provided by the VDOE on the alignment of state Standards of Learning to college- and career- readiness. Additional coursework enriches that exposure in the specific licensure areas. For example, candidates are prompted through assignments to develop an IEP for the post-secondary school transition of a secondary age student with a severe disability (Adapted; SEDP 632) or to reflect on the role of early childhood special education on the college- and career- outcomes for a preschool student (Early Childhood Special Education; ECSE 700); and to explore practical career support activities, transition planning, and emphasis on increasing academic achievement for students with disabilities (Special Education General Curriculum; SEDP 501, 602, 603, 607, 611, 630). Secondary programs include instruction on literary strategies that support structural analysis of vocabulary, use of context to determine meaning of words, and reading non-fiction texts (TEDU 562); prompts to critically analyze and evaluate texts to develop an evidence-based argument on licensure-specific content (TEDU 547/681); and collaboration and collaborative project-based learning (TEDU 681). These strategies, in turn, support P-12 students' critical thinking, collaboration, and communication skills. The EPP Initial Programs Diversity Inventory (11), and InTASC alignment tables (1) further detail course- and clinical- assignments, readings, and experiences aligned to the EPP's commitment to ensuring candidates are prepared to support access for all P-12 students for college- and career- readiness.

Evidence confirms that candidates demonstrate skills and commitment that afford all P-12 students access to rigorous college- and career-ready standards. At mid-program, candidates demonstrate proficiency by planning instruction and activities, aligned to state content standards and consistent with students' development, that foster deep content knowledge, cross-disciplinary learning, problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaboration, key skills articulated in CAEP component 1.4. Data indicate candidates perform at Acceptable levels at mid-point (3). In clinical experiences, candidates refine these planning skills, aligned to CAEP component 1.4, and demonstrate proficiency in implementation of instructional approaches that promote collaboration and communication, cross-disciplinary learning and application of knowledge, as well as problem-solving. Multiple indicators confirm candidates effectively differentiate instruction, using a variety of strategies responsive to students' diverse needs and experiences, and maintain the dispositional commitment to create and support a learning environment that encourages the academic and social growth of all students. Further, candidates demonstrate the ability to identify or develop methods of assessing student work that require problem-solving and/or critical thinking as appropriate. Data indicate Acceptable or Target performance on all items assessed in student teaching (3). Trends suggest the highest scores rated for dispositional items, with a few items approaching Target related to supporting candidate's planning and implementation of strategies that promote student problem-solving, critical thinking, collaboration, and self-direction.

1.5 Model and Apply Technology Standards

Course- and clinical- based opportunities for candidates to plan and apply technology are guided by CAEP component 1.5 (1) and integrate technology expectations across the four inTASC categories. Completer feedback predating this CAEP self-study (10) indicated completers felt less prepared in relation to technology knowledge and skills relative to other program competencies. As such, the EPP identified the need to focus instruction time on technology integration in pedagogical practice. Each program included technology in the licensure area methods course as appropriate to that licensure area. For example, music education candidates focus on specific music technologies; whereas, special education candidates in each of the three licensure areas learn and plan for the appropriate use of assistive technologies. Elementary and secondary programs added a dedicated two-credit course to supplement instruction in the methods courses. This dedicated course (TEDU 510) (10) is intended to assist educators in effectively integrating technology into their teaching practice to improve student learning. Elementary and secondary candidates participate in hands-on experiences with a variety of instructional technologies and learn how to integrate technology into practice using research-driven theoretical frameworks. Candidates demonstrate proficiency in selecting and integrating appropriate technologies to enhance student learning through performance on the mid-program lesson plan and CEC assessment in student teaching. Similar to other performance patterns, three years of data indicate growth in planning related to technology from mid-program to clinical experience with scores improving from Acceptable, on average, to Target, on average (3). Further, candidates demonstrate Acceptable or Target mean scores on dispositions for using technology at mid- and final-program to enrich professional practice, as well as the ability to track and share performance data digitally (3).

Use of candidate performance evidence to inform data-driven improvements

Standard 1 evidence derived from varied measure sources indicate VCU EPP ensures that candidates are competent in the InTASC Standards. For example, candidates demonstrate deep content knowledge, as well as skills for using research and evidence in the classroom, effectively applying technology, and supporting college and career-readiness, through pedagogy, for diverse P-12 learners.

The EPP monitors candidate performance through direct instruction in coursework and at our transition point gates. In addition, program faculty conduct annual reviews of aggregate program candidate InTASC/CAEP outcomes to reflect on learning and opportunities to enhance performance through curriculum and pedagogy. The Quality Assurance System maintains procedures to ensure faculty, leadership, and critical stakeholders maintain access to aggregate data on common EPP assessments, as well as disaggregated program data. The Office of Assessment aggregates annualized candidate learning outcomes data on key program assessments and shares data reports each fall via program-level data dashboards (85.1, 92). Further, programs are prompted to review outcomes, discuss among faculty, and plan for needed revisions. Taskstream, a university assessment management system, is used by each program to document summaries of learning and opportunities for continuous improvement (91.1-91.4).

Based on key assessment data, corroborated by varied evidence sources, initial programs identify ways to adjust curriculum to enhance learning and preparation for candidates. Several key EPP-wide revisions include: (1) the transition to InTASC Standards as a framework for initial preparation, including curriculum alignments and revisions to common assessments; (2) the addition of TEDU 510 Technology course (10) for elementary and secondary candidates; (3) enhanced emphasis on college- and career- readiness standards (1) as guided by VDOE resources; (4) updated curriculum matrices ensuring program alignments to 2018 approved VDOE Regulations (7). At the program level, as evidenced in the annual reports on use of data (91.1-91.4), revisions to course content aim to enhance preparation related to diversity and inclusion of English Language Learners (Secondary), special education students (Secondary course added), general inclusion content (Visual Arts), and recruitment of diverse cooperating teachers and faculty (Elementary). Further, several programs continue to revise course content to enhance candidate readiness for classroom management, particularly in high need schools (Visual Arts, Elementary, Secondary); this need is corroborated by employers and completer feedback (78.1; 79.1). Lastly, both Special Education General Curriculum and Early Childhood Special Education, continue to plan for more systematic data collection on candidate common assessments in the Tk20 system, and partner with the Office of Assessment to manage this integration of Tk20 into regular program processes.

Closing Statement

The EPP demonstrates candidates are proficient in content knowledge of their field and pedagogies to teach that content to support the learning of their diverse P-12 students. Data disaggregation of EPP key assessments by program suggests candidate performance is consistent across initial licensure programs. Ongoing analysis of EPP common assessments provides accumulating evidence to support the reliability and validity of the measures. Programs and the EPP continue to explore methods for supporting in-depth and systematic reviews of evidence to ensure data are used to effect quality continuous improvement efforts.

Summary of Evidence and Supporting Documentation

• 1: Alignment of curriculum and key activities to InTASC standards
• 2.1: n_10 CAEP Initial Standard 1, 1.1 Component, InTASC Data Tables, 2017-18
• 2.2: n_10 CAEP Initial Standard 1, 1.1 Component, InTASC Data Tables, 2018-19
• 2.3: n_10 CAEP Initial Standard 1, 1.1 Component, InTASC Data Tables, 2019-20
• 3: CAEP Initial Standard 1, 1.2-1.5 Data Tables, 2017-2020
• 4: Initial Licensure Exam Content Knowledge Evidence
• 5: Special Education Content Knowledge Assessment Data
• 6: n_10 Principal Evaluation of VCU Student Interns
• 7: Initial Licensure VDOE Sample Curriculum Matrices
• 8: Other National Accreditation and SPA Recognition Letters
• 9: VDOE State Approval Letter
• 10: Data-driven technology course addition TEDU 510
• 11: Diversity Curriculum Mapping Initial Consolidated Analysis

The provider ensures that candidates for professional specialties develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their field of preparation and, by completion, are able to use professional specialty practices flexibly to advance the learning of P-12 students toward attainment of college- and career-readiness standards.

SUMMARY

The VCU EPP maintains a strong record of excellence in its advanced programs for professional educators (i.e., Math Specialist, Reading Specialist, School Counseling, Educational Leadership-Admin & Supervision). Each advanced program is designed to create opportunities for candidates to develop a deep understanding of critical concepts and principles of their specialized field. In addition, advanced program candidates develop the ability to apply professional specialty practices, including technology skills among others, and advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career- readiness.

EXAMPLES OF EXCELLENCE IN PRACTICE

• Candidates demonstrate content knowledge
  1. Candidates meet or exceed state and internal performance benchmarks on all assessments of content knowledge.
• Emerging evidence of candidate competency on CAEP professional standards
  1. The VCU EPP presents two cycles of evidence of proficiency in the CAEP general professional skills articulated in A.1. Programs continue to collect assessment data to confirm three-year trends in performance and also to ensure reliability and validity of the assessments; these efforts are presented as a phase-in plan.

IMPROVEMENTS EMERGING FROM THE SELF-STUDY

• All advanced licensure programs updated curriculum matrices ensuring program alignments to new 2018 approved VDOE Regulations.
• Advanced programs continue to examine the reliability and validity of EPP-created assessments and began to engage partners in reviewing assessments and data to ensure all program assessments meet or exceed CAEP sufficiency level for rubrics.

VCU EPP maintains a strong record of excellence in its advanced programs for professional educators (i.e., Math Specialist, Reading Specialist, School Counseling, Educational Leadership/Admin & Supervision) since its 2013 NCATE visit. All advanced licensure EPP programs are nationally or state reviewed (9; 8). Through performance outcomes aligned to A.1.2 CAEP professional skills and A.1.1 specialty-specific professional and state standards, advanced program candidates demonstrate competence and their readiness to undertake school responsibilities in the specialized areas for which they prepared.

Each advanced program is designed to create opportunities for candidates to develop a deep understanding of critical concepts and principles of their specialized field. In addition, candidates develop the ability to apply professional specialty practices, including technology skills among others, and advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career- readiness. Guided by the CAEP Standards, advanced program faculty reviewed and modified the curriculum as needed to ensure all advanced program candidates have the opportunity to learn and apply the professional skills needed for each licensure area. Curriculum maps demonstrate the alignment of all VCU EPP advanced programs to standards for specialized content knowledge and the CAEP professional skills, with skills and content introduced and reinforced across the curriculum, both in coursework and clinical experiences. (12; 13). Across programs, advanced candidates demonstrate proficiency in specialized content area knowledge (15), as well as emerging phase-in evidence of proficiency in the general professional skills (14) expected of all advanced professionals entering and serving schools as articulated in A.1.1.

Standard A.1 data sources

VCU EPP's quality assurance system includes varied measures for each advanced program (85.1; 85.2) that are assessed throughout the program. Advanced measures include EPP-created course- and clinical-based content and performance assessments, licensure assessments, and comprehensive examinations.

A.1.1 Candidate Professional Skills for the Field of Specialization

VCU advanced candidates have the opportunity to learn and apply the knowledge and skills appropriate to their professional field, and phase-in assessment data indicate candidates' high proficiency in these skills (12; 14). The following section will detail how each of the CAEP advanced professional skills is addressed across advanced programs, and key assessments and data (14) will be reported. Evidence 12 details all alignments; 14 includes all data reports. A Phase-in Plan details additional planned steps to ensure assessments meet CAEP sufficiency, three complete cycles of data, and review of evidence with partners (18).

CAEP Professional Skills: "Application of data literacy" and the "Use of research and understanding of qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed-methods methodologies". The two CAEP professional skills, "application of data literacy" and the "use of research and understanding of qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed-methods methodologies", are related, and VCU EPP advanced programs address the two in overlapping ways; therefore, evidence for these two skills is presented together.

Opportunities to learn and apply knowledge of research methods and demonstrate data literacy take shape in a foundational research methods course for the School Counseling and Educational Leadership programs. Candidates gain an understanding of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods approaches to research and learn to read and evaluate research and plan an empirical study. A series of courses and assignments in the Reading program requires candidates to link best practices and evidence-based research to support instructional plans and activities for teaching students and coaching teachers. The Mathematics Specialist candidates gain these skills through foundational knowledge of statistics and methods for math, specifically, through the lens of research methods for action research. They apply these research methods and skills to develop a research-based (e.g., action research) project during the externship which focused on mathematics in teacher leadership.The project includes a plan for projection implementation, data collection, and analysis. Further, advanced program candidates practice these skills in clinical experiences throughout the program by applying their understanding of research methods and data literacy to employ student- and school-level data to inform program and pedagogical planning to enhance learning and the learning environment in P-12 schools.

For the School Counseling program, these two skills - "application of data literacy" and the "use of research and understanding of qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed-methods methodologies" - are key assessments for the professional program area. A rubric-based assessment in the foundational research methods course (EDUS 660), aligns to specific research skills for school counselors, and CACREP Standards. Specifically, candidates prepare a research proposal that requires: (1) identification of a problem, (2) review of related research, (3) creation of a research question or hypothesis, (4) application of a research design, (5) application of procedures for interventions and/or gathering data, (6) a discussion of how to analyze the data, and (7) a discussion of the limitations of the proposed study. Evidence for the most recent two complete data cycles indicates mean scores of Proficient or higher on all data literacy and use of research methods items for years 2017-18 and 2018-19. (14). For 2019-20, the mean score on one item, "Sampling Bias", fell slightly below proficient (2.95/3.0) (14); 5/19 students in this cohort received Needs Improvement ratings on select rows. Each of these skills are assessed in the clinical setting, both during practicum and internship experiences. In these clinical contexts, school counseling candidates select research and evidence-based strategies for working with students and collect and analyze student data to make data-driven decisions at the school site for programming needs. Evidence on clinical based rubric-rows aligned with these skills also indicates 100% of candidates demonstrated scores of Adequate or higher on all data literacy and use of research methods for years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 (14).

Candidates in the Math Specialist program demonstrate proficiency in the "application of data literacy". Two program assessments are used to evaluate mathematics content with one based in the school setting. For the 2019 graduating cohort, data on the mathematics content exam indicate 25/26 (96.2%) of candidates demonstrated "complete understanding" of the two data literacy items (i.e., Representing data; Analysis of real-world problems using statistics) (14). Given the nature of this program, only one cycle of data is available to date on the Externship Action Research project and the findings indicated that 100% of 2019 graduating cohort candidates demonstrated literacy at the "accomplished" level. The results are evidenced by a focused and comprehensive literature review that draws clear connections between the literature base, the externship project purpose and methods and research questions (14). The Phase-in Plan for component A.1.1 (18) details the plan for data collection and analysis as math specialist cohorts enter and complete the licensure program.

CAEP Professional Skill: Use data analysis and evidence to develop or maintain supportive school environments

All four advanced programs incorporate assignments into the clinicals that guide candidates to use data analysis and evidence to develop or maintain supportive school environments (12). Reading Specialist candidates conduct an evaluation of a school-wide literacy program by analyzing grade level assessment data and components of the program to make recommendations for improvement related to personnel, materials, assessment, family engagement, etc. School Counseling candidates analyze varied datasets, as relevant, in both practicum and internship to understand student- and school- needs to guide programming. Both the ed leadership and math specialist programs identified "use of data analysis and evidence to develop supportive school environments" as a signature professional skill of the program that is assessed and monitored as a key assessment.

Math Specialist candidates make use of candidate learning data to develop and adjust lesson plans, both independently and collaboratively with other teachers on the Lesson Study project and Lesson Planning and Collaborative Planning projects, to support candidate learning. Candidates also observe a K-8 math teacher and analyze observational data to provide coaching feedback to the teacher through pre- and post- observation discussions. These opportunities to practice the use of data analysis and evidence are measured on a key assessment, Externship Action Research Report and Presentation, during Externship. The outcome requires candidates to develop and implement an action research project focused on mathematics teacher leadership. Candidates are required to plan, collect data and conduct an analysis based on research methods. Lastly, the candidates will synthesize and apply results to enhance teacher instruction in mathematics. Spring 2019 assessment results from the Externship Project indicate that 100% (n=26) of candidates met or exceeded expectations on items related to the use of data and evidence to support school environments (14). As noted earlier, Phase-in Plans are in place to support collection of three cycles of data over time.

CAEP Professional Skill: Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others

Faculty in Administration and Supervision (A&S/Ed Leadership), Reading and Math Specialist programs selected the professional skill "leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others" as a critical skill for the professional area to be assessed and monitored as a key assessment. School Counseling addresses the skill in the program by providing foundational understandings of leadership and collaboration in counseling, as well as the application of leadership and collaboration to develop and implement a comprehensive school counseling program. Further, School Counseling candidates practice these skills in practicums and internships where they demonstrate what they learned by collaborating with families and other professionals in direct counseling contact activities. (12)

Reading program candidates have multiple opportunities to learn, practice, and demonstrate the skills of leadership and collaboration. In the evaluation of a school-wide literacy program, candidates practice these skills demonstrated in their leadership and recommendations they make for program improvement. During externship, candidates share the findings from their Action Research Project as professional development with colleagues, demonstrating leadership. Data indicate 98.96% (2017-18) and 100% (2018-19) and 100% (2019-20) of candidates achieve ratings of Adequate or better on the evaluation of this presentation to school colleagues (14). Further, through an internship, candidates participate in case study seminars where they share with colleagues the results of student assessments from one-on-one tutoring and discuss instructional strategies to support student learning. They also share these results and recommendations for future instruction, in the form of a Progress Report, with the students' parents. Data indicate 100% of candidates perform at Acceptable or better levels on all rows in 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 (14).

Ed Leadership candidates participate in a series of assignments leading to four key program assessments through which they demonstrate their depth of knowledge on leading and collaborating with others in school settings. In Internship, candidates focus on a school or district problem and work collaboratively to improve student learning by initiating and implementing a plan of action. Data on the Educational Intervention Plan indicate candidates effectively engage stakeholders in the development, implementation, and ongoing support of a plan targeted at improving student learning, with 100% achieving Target level. Further, on the Leadership to Support Student Learning assessment data indicate candidates effectively develop a plan for communicating the problem and proposed solution with stakeholders in a two-way process, with 100% (2017-18), 92.9% (2018-19), and 100% (2019-20) of candidates achieving Acceptable or Target ratings on all skills (14). By using the clinical observation model, candidates engage in the process of implementing the traditional clinical observation model with a pre-conference, observation, and post-conference with a teacher. This requires the candidate plan effectively to promote effective instructional practice; implement a system of supervision that links teacher goals and needs with a measure and feedback style; provide timely and actionable feedback; develop plans for professional development that connect to teacher needs and goals; and engage effectively with the teacher for feedback and input. Three year data trends indicate 100% (2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20) of candidates performed at Acceptable or Target levels (14). Lastly, candidates are assessed by the on-site supervisor based on demonstration of skills for leading collaborative activities by setting instructional direction; encouraging and modeling teamwork; organizational ability; verbal and written communication skills; and teaching and coaching skills that develop others. Findings indicate 85.7% of 2017-18 candidates, 100% of 2018-19 candidates, and 100% of 2019-20 meet the benchmark (Acceptable-Target) (14).

Math Specialist candidates collaborate and lead other teachers in the analysis of student learning and teacher observation data to develop instructional plans and methods for math instruction. Program faculty developed a new assignment, Content Coaching Cycle Project, that requires candidates plan and facilitate a mathematics content coaching cycle with a classroom teacher. This includes planning, modeling/co-teaching, and debriefing with the teacher. This requires communicating about the content and pedagogy with a teacher, working together as a team throughout the activity, and applying the appropriate coaching skills. As candidates enroll in this course and engage in this assignment, performance data will be assessed and analyzed to determine candidate proficiencies related to coaching/leading; the Phase-in Plan details the upcoming data cycles.

CAEP Professional Skill: Technology

Technology skills are addressed in the curriculum of each advanced program with opportunities for candidates to practice those skills to support application of appropriate technology for their field of specialization. Opportunities include: use of technology for math computations including calculators and virtual manipulatives (Math Specialist); use of appropriate technology system for data collection, management, analysis, and monitoring of candidate progress (Educational Leadership/A&S); use of technology solutions to support pedagogical approaches in delivering a school counseling program (School Counseling). For the Reading Specialist program, technology is indicated as a key professional skill. Candidates are expected to integrate technology, including the use of digital texts, in their one-on-one tutoring during the internship and to document it on their lesson plans. Further, during the externship, they are expected to integrate technology in their action research project and keep a technology integration log to document their approaches. Technology integration is assessed on both the Internship Evaluation and the Externship Action Research Report with data indicating proficiency with 100% of 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 candidates achieving Target level performance on technology items (14).

CAEP Professional Skill: Professional Dispositions

All advanced programs emphasize professional dispositions for advanced school professionals in our P-12 schools, and the professional and state standards to which each program aligns requires curriculum and clinical experiences to learn and practice professional dispositions and understanding of laws, policies, and codes of ethics and standards for that P-12 school role. As such, both the A.1.1 and A.1.2 alignment tables for content-specific and general professional skills detail multiple instances in the program that teach and assess candidate dispositions. Examples of coursework related to ethical considerations, professional issues and standards include: CLED 600 Professional Orientation and Ethical Practice in Counseling, ADMS 611 School Law, ADMS 640 HR and Fiscal management, ADMS 624 Principals as HR Agents, and READ 605 Organizing and Implementing Reading Programs. The Reading Specialist, Educational Leadership/A&S, and School Counseling denote dispositions assessment as a key professional skill assessment as well. All three programs assess and monitor dispositions both formatively, mid-program, and summatively, in internship with dispositional assessments developed in alignment to professional standards (i.e., ILA, NELP, CACREP). Summative data indicate 100% of candidates in all three programs for 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 demonstrate appropriate application of professional dispositions (Acceptable/Adequate to Target ratings), with summary findings consistent across data collection cycles (14).

College- and career- readiness

Advanced candidates learn about college- and career- readiness standards and engage in course-based and clinical assignments that extend candidate knowledge to apply to their particular professional area, serving diverse populations and ensuring equity in opportunity for P-12 learners. Math and reading specialists focus on incorporating instructional strategies that support differentiation and high expectations for college or career for all students. At the school-wide level, educational leadership and school counseling candidates focus on strategies that move school populations to success in college- and career- readiness through individual, grade, or school level initiatives and programming. Detailed information for diversity alignments to course and clinical experiences are included, by program, in the Advanced Programs Inventory (17).

A.1.2 Specialized Content Knowledge

All advanced program courses align to Virginia Department of Education Board of Education Regulations as reflected in curriculum matrices (16), and each program is approved by the VDOE (9). In addition to state regulations, to provide an additional framework for ensuring relevant and comprehensive curricula, courses (13) and outcomes (15) for each program align to national professional standards as appropriate for the discipline: Administration and Supervision/Educational Leadership (National Educational Leadership Preparation) and Math Specialist (Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences; Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for Mathematics). School Counseling and Reading are aligned to and nationally recognized/accredited by their professional organization, Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs and International Literacy Association, respectively (8).

For VCU EPP, the VDOE biennial measures, a report of the most recent two years of advanced completers' content-area knowledge outcomes on licensure examinations, provide our summative exit outcomes of content knowledge that can be externally benchmarked. VDOE articulates a 70% pass rate on licensure examinations as the minimum threshold. For three cycles of VDOE Biennial reports (15) on completers (2015, 2017, 2019), 89.5-100% of Reading program completers passed the VRA or RVE and 92.6-100% of Educational Leadership program completers passed the SLLA.

The Math Specialist and School Counseling programs do not have state-required licensure assessments as in the other advanced programs. Therefore, these two programs summatively assess content knowledge using EPP-created assessments. Math Specialist candidates sit for a Mathematics Comprehensive Examination at the completion of math content courses. The purpose of the assessment is to gauge candidates' understanding of mathematics concepts and skills after completing the five core math content courses of the preparation program. The assessment is benchmarked internally where at least 85% of candidates will receive a satisfactory (86%-92%) or exemplary score (93%-100%) (15). Data for the most recent three cohorts of candidates (2014, 2018, 2019) indicate candidates' exemplary content knowledge (mean scores 95.2-96.8%) (15). Summative assessment of school counseling specific knowledge and application of counseling skills occurs in Internship, assessed with the Clinical Evaluation Continuum. Data indicate 100% of candidates achieved Adequate to Target ratings on all rubric items for the last four data cycles (2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19; 2019-20) (15).

In addition to the SLLA licensure assessment, Ed Leadership/A&S employs four additional course and clinical based assessments to monitor content knowledge for the program. Data over the last three data cycles (2017-18; 2018-19; 2019-20) indicate 100% of candidates perform at Acceptable or better levels on the Educational Intervention Plan and Using the Clinical Observation Model to Improve Instruction (15). For the On-Site Supervisor Assessment, 87.3% performed at Acceptable or Target levels by rubric row (15). For the Leadership to Support Student Learning rubric rows, 78% of candidates (2017-18), 80% of candidates (2018-19) and 100% (2019-20) performed Acceptable or higher (15).

The Reading Specialist program also uses ILA standard-aligned rubrics to assess course and clinical based content knowledge, in addition to the licensure assessment. These include the Philosophy of Literacy paper assessing foundational knowledge (ILA Standard 1) on which the majority of candidates demonstrate proficiency (Acceptable-Target) on all items - 2016-17 (100%); 2017-18 (100%) (15). For the 2018-19 data cycle, all item mean scores are in the Acceptable to Target range except for one (i.e., Candidates understand theories related to learner development to address learner differences = Mean (2.90 on 4.0 scale) (15). Five of ten candidates earned the Beginning rating on that item. Further, two to three of ten (20-30%) candidates demonstrated Beginning performance on three additional items. For four cycles (2016-17; 2017-18; 2018-19; 2019-20), 100% of Reading Specialist candidates demonstrated Acceptable to Target ratings on all Dispositions assessments aligned to ILA Standards 4, 6, 7 as well as all Intnership assessments aligned to ILA Standards (2-7) (15). On the Externship Action Research Project, 100% of 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 candidates demonstrated Acceptable to Target ratings on all items, with 92.9 (13 of 14) achieving the same for 2016-17 (15).

Standard A.1 data quality Phase-in Plan

Systematic procedures are in place to ensure data quality for each key assessment (5.c). Guided by the Phase-in Plan (18), data collection and analysis is underway to explore and confirm that measures, and interpretations from the measures, meet CAEP sufficient level criteria.

The EPP A.1 Phase-in Plan (18) details strategic steps projected for upcoming semesters to guide faculty and stakeholders through review of not only the performance of candidates on the learning outcomes assessments, but also of the assessments themselves to evaluate their validity and utility for measuring advanced candidate performance along the key professional skills. Specifically, efforts are scaffolded by semester for spring 2020 to spring 2021 to support the collection of three cycles of trend data, in-depth rubric analyses, and development of the guidance document to document the evidence for reliability and validity to ensure assessments meet or exceed the CAEP sufficient level for EPP-created assessments.

To date, each advanced program gathered expert faculty to develop rubrics aligned to CAEP and key professional standards to ensure content validity. P-12 partners evaluated Educational Leadership/A&S rubrics for content validity, and professional organizations reviewed and approved assessments for both the Reading (8) and School Counseling (8). Math Specialist rubrics will be reviewed by partners as discussed in the phase-in. To support faculty and stakeholder review of standard A.4 evidence for quality and sufficiency, the assessment office staff conducted statistical analyses for select measures, based on sample sizes, to explore further evidence for reliability and validity. Assessment Office staff will continue to analyze data across programs, as minimum samples are collected, to ensure robust measures are in place.

Use of A.1 evidence for continuous improvement

Program faculty monitor candidate performance in ongoing ways, both through direct instruction in coursework and through monitoring of outcomes at our transition point gates. In addition, annually, programs review aggregate program candidate learning outcomes to reflect on learning and opportunities to enhance learning and performance through curriculum and pedagogy. As detailed in the Quality Assurance System Handbook (85.1), the Office of Assessment aggregates annualized learning outcomes data on key assessments and shares data reports with program coordinators and school leadership each fall via data dashboards. Programs are prompted to review outcomes, discuss as a faculty, and plan for needed revisions. The University assessment management system, Taskstream, is used by each program to document summaries of learning and opportunities for continuous improvement. Based on key assessment data, each advanced program has identified ways to adjust curriculum to enhance learning and preparation for candidates in the past three data cycles (91.1; 91.2; 91.3; 91.4). For example, the School Counseling program reviewed all learning outcomes and course content in 2018-19, which informed shifts of content and assignments between courses to better align to professional standards. Further, the program included additional content on "the use of technology in programming" and "the use of data analysis to inform planning" based on feedback from candidates on their learning experience and preparation. Similarly, using site supervisor feedback, in 2018-19, Educational Leadership/A&S faculty reviewed dispositions assessment content, as well as its alignment to coursework to confirm content validity based on NELP Standards. The Math Specialist faculty identified opportunities to adjust course content and increase instruction on professional writing based on data from the comprehensive content examination and externship action research project. Reading faculty identified opportunities to enhance skills in collaboration upon review of 2018-19 rubric performance from the assignment "Evaluation of a school-wide literacy program". The revised assignment engages the candidates in analyzing grade-level assessment data and practicing the skill in collaboration with class peers to support them in conducting an analysis with teachers in the field.

The analysis and interpretation of data on EPP-created rubrics specifically through the lens of CAEP professional skills in A.1.1 is a recent development for the EPP. Historically, programs analyzed candidate learning data by assessment. However, the CAEP lens of advanced professional skills prompted a new approach to data aggregation and analysis that creates opportunities to understand candidate performance as it relates to specific skills across assessments. The QAS adjusted the aggregation and reporting procedures for key assessment data, and beginning in spring 2020, program faculty reviewed row-level rubric data organized by professional skill. As multiple years of data are collected, robust evidence will be available for programs to discern growth from mid-program to exit on related outcomes and also to discern a more holistic interpretation of performance on a particular professional skill, across coursework and clinical contexts. As we move forward, annual review of evidence by programs will be scaffolded to support guided discussions of how candidates are performing relative to the professional skill and opportunities to engage P-12 partners in review of data and curriculum to ensure each skill is appropriately addressed and assessed.

Closing Statement

With varied professional standards and expectations for practice, each advanced program hosts a unique set of EPP-created program assessments. However, aggregate findings by program indicate the performance of advanced candidates is consistently strong across licensure areas. The Phase-in Plan for each program includes a timeline for data collection and analysis and review of the data quality findings with P-12 partners, as well as an additional timeline for internal review and revisions for full implementation as VCU builds evidence for advanced Standard A.1. As Phase-in Plans are implemented, trend data for A.1.1 professional skills will be available across all programs to speak to sustained patterns of performance.

Summary of Evidence and Supporting Documentation:

• 12: A.1.1 - VCU Advanced CAEP Standards Alignment Tables
• 13: A.1.2 Advanced Professional Area Standards Alignment
• 14: A.1.1 Advanced Data Tables
• 15: A.1.2 Advanced Data Tables
• 16: Advanced VDOE Endorsement Alignment Samples
• 17: Diversity Mapping Inventory Advanced
• 18: CAEP PHASE-IN PLAN_ A.1 Advanced Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional
• 8: Other National Accreditation and SPA Recognition Letters
• 9: VDOE State Approval Letter