Committee on Advanced Professional Certification
(CAPC)
September 9, 2002
Approved

Present: Becky Butler (ETRA), Anne Davidson (Commun. Dis.), Joe Saban (LESO), Norman Stahl (LTCY), Gregg Waas (Psychology), Scott Wickman (CAHE), Margaret Bridge (University Coordinator of Teacher Certification), Robert Wheeler (Interim Vice Provost), Diane Jackman (Associate Dean, College of Education), Chris Sorensen (Dean, College of Education)

Meeting Times and Dates
The committee will meet on the first Monday of the month from 8:30 to 9:45 in Graham Hall 423.

Conceptual Framework
The committee discussed creating a Conceptual Framework for the Advanced Programs or working with CITC to adapt their Conceptual Framework to meet the needs of the advanced programs.

The CITC document will have to be reviewed to find the problem areas. The current CITC document is in need of revision to address the ISBE rubric. A faculty member will be compensated with a course release for re-writing the document.

CAPC and CITC are separate but equal groups. The unit Assessment Committee and the Conceptual Framework committee meet rarely and they do not have a standard time. There may be a need for representation from CAPC on these two committees. It is important in the two areas where CITC and CAPC cross that we have someone from CAPC participate in those discussions.

Tracking Advanced Candidates
Last year the committee looked at the RATC form as a way to track students. The RATC form needs to be implemented soon.

Registration and Records identified codes that enable them to produce a report for students pursuing certification or for those students who have completed a certification. Advisors or a department designee will be responsible for reporting information. Registration and Records can link demographic information.

The SAL form needs to be changed to ask if students are pursuing certification. Many of the advanced programs have SALs. All of the certification programs could be listed and ask the SAL to check the initial or advanced certification they plan to pursue. Bob will ask Carla Montgomery about revising the form. Does it make sense to develop codes around approvals and endorsements for program reviews? The student information database cannot keep track of more than one thing at a time. Start with getting an internal system in place and then see how we can get tracking done in the university system.

A system needs to be in place that documents when students are placed in diverse settings.
The definition of a diverse setting is the percentage of minority students, the percentage of students defined as low income, limited English proficient, or with a disability. Rural, suburban, and urban will be added as a code as well.

Initial programs are going to be doing exit surveys and advanced programs will need to do exit surveys for unit level assessment. We have to look at common elements for unit level assessment such as an exit survey with items we all ask. Portfolios are required by NCATE. We could have some items across portfolios at the unit level and develop a rubric to assess those particular items. Individuals could be brought in for one or two days during the summer to assess a random sample of portfolios on a common rubric.

Must assess dispositions, but no decision has been made about how we are going to do that as a unit.

Norm Stahl drafted some bylaws last year and the committee needs to review these. The bylaws will be first on the agenda for the October meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 9:48.