Dear President Hernandez:

In the spring semester of 2008, the College of Education (COE) faculty and professional staff voted to recommend a change of our national accreditation agency from the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) to the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC). The entire College of Education faculty is cognizant of the fact that maintaining national accreditation is vital to the viability not only of the COE, but of the University as a whole. Therefore, this recommendation was made after careful consideration and based on extensive examination and evaluation of both the TEAC and NCATE accreditation processes. The faculty and professional staff have been actively engaged in the process of evaluating accreditation options since a college ad hoc accreditation committee was formed in spring 2006 (The committee became a college standing committee in fall 2007.). This engagement has included sending COE representatives to TEAC and NCATE training sessions, considerable dissemination of information to faculty and staff about the processes, and extended discussions about the processes at three all faculty/staff meetings.

The culmination of the COE Accreditation Committee’s endeavors is the enclosed report which delineates the steps and timeline for the activities that will be necessary to develop the inquiry brief proposal required by the TEAC process. As you will note, the process is not easier nor less labor-intensive than NCATE, but it is the consensus of the COE faculty who will be implementing it that it is a more relevant and authentic process that will engage the entire faculty in collaborative inquiry and positively impact the quality of the programs of the COE.

The following points briefly summarize the reasoning behind the recommendation to adopt the TEAC accreditation process:

1. The stated goal of TEAC is “to support the preparation of competent, caring, and qualified professional educators.” This approach to accreditation supports a more scholarly focus deeply embedded in reflective inquiry which is attuned with the COE’s mission statement – to prepare reflective practitioners in an urban environment.
2. The TEAC process is inquiry-driven and fosters a culture of evidence. The “action research” format that is the foundation of the accreditation process is familiar to COE faculty and one which facilitates the development of a community of scholars.
3. The preparation of the Inquiry Brief empowers faculty to collaboratively develop meaningful outcomes and credible assessment measures that reliably and validly provide evidence about outcomes, and form the basis for continuous evidence-based program improvement. In anticipation of a possible change in the accreditation agency, some members of the faculty are already engaging in reflection activities to improve their students’ learning outcomes, not because the evaluation process is upcoming, but because they are excited and feel involved in creating and researching which variables contribute to the success of COE programs. This level of motivation and enthusiasm has not been observed throughout the NCATE process.
4. TEAC utilizes an audit process to ensure quality. The TEAC process is very much in line with the self reflection required in the Middle States process as well as in line with local school districts evaluation processes. Therefore, TEAC reflects a more current approach to the evaluation of educational institutions.
5. TEAC has frugality in use of resources as a prominent principle. In these economic times, this reason needs no elaboration.

The Accreditation Committee and the COE faculty and professional staff appreciate your time and your consideration of this recommendation report. It is proffered with the same spirit of respect, collegiality, and shared governance in which it was created.

Respectfully,