The Model For Professional Preparation
LICENSURE FOR SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS AND EDUCATIONAL AUDIOLOGISTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
The Department of Audiology & Speech Sciences (SLHS) has one program that leads to teacher licensure. Students in the Master's degree program of Speech Language Pathology (MS-SLP) may elect to plan a program of study that meets the licensure requirements of the Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB). For many years, these programs were governed by Rules 46-47 and categorized as "Speech & Hearing Clinician" for speech-language pathologist who work in public schools and the license for school-based audiologist was "Educational Audiologist." Licensure for employment in Indiana schools was recently reformed. A proposal to have speech-language pathology as a separate license category was submitted to the Standards Committee of IPSB in spring of 2001. In January, 2002, the IPSB Executive Committee ruled that licensure for speech-language pathologists who work in the schools would be a stand-alone license, at the Master's degree level, and would be classified as a teaching license. The Indiana Professional Standards Board has now approved this reclassification and according to Indiana Professional Standards Board Rules, 2002 candidates in this program will be licensed with an instructional license under the category of "Communication Disorders." This reflects a change from the previous categorization of licensure under "School Services." Candidates who enter the Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences program of teacher education beginning Fall 2003 or later may be licensed under the 2002 rules. The Purdue University School of Education continues to recommend program completers under Rules 46-47 until the beginning of fall 2004.
Specific teacher licensure does not currently exist for Educational Audiology, however if it is licensed through IPSB in the future the SLHS Unit Assessment System would also address Audiology. *AuD program materials are included in this document for purposes of completeness, as the audiology clinical track is part of the ASHA accredited program.
ACCREDITATION OF EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN
SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY AND AUDIOLOGY
Education reforms in Indiana have reflected national changes that comply with the guidelines of the Council American Speech-Language-Hearing Association on Academic Accreditation (CAA) and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). The Purdue University Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology clinical degree programs are accredited by the American Speech Language Hearing Association, which is an NCATE affiliated organization. In accordance with the standards set forth by each of these governing bodies, the Department of SLHS has created a Unit Assessment System incorporating formative and summative forms of assessment.
Principles of Formative Assessment
As defined by the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA), formative assessment is a system of evaluations which demonstrate that an individual has met the educational program's requirements for demonstrating satisfactory performance in target areas of knowledge and skills via periodic assessment of knowledge and skills in such areas
as critical thinking, decision making, and problem-solving skills. Measures include oral and
written components as well as demonstrations of clinical proficiency. Documentation of
formative assessment results is to be maintained and verified by the ASHA program director and made available upon request.
Targets in the formative assessment process that are described by NCATE include:
· Implementation of an assessment system with the involvement of its professional community, that reflects the conceptual framework(s) and incorporates candidate proficiencies outlined in professional (ASHA) and state standards.
· Continuous examination of the validity and utility of the data produced through assessments.
· Modifications in assessment based on changes in assessment technology and in professional standards.
· Decisions about candidate performance based on multiple assessments made at multiple points before program completion.
· Program self-assessment to establish fairness, accuracy, and consistency of its performance assessment procedures with changes in procedures based on the results of the ongoing self-assessment.
· Implementation of the assessment system in a way that provides regular and comprehensive data on program quality, unit operations, and candidate performance by at least the completion of each year of the program involving multiple assessments from both internal and as appropriate, external sources.
· Systematic collection, compilation, summary and analysis of formative assessment data reported publicly for the purpose of improving candidate performance, program quality and program operation.
· Ongoing review of current information technologies that might be used to improve the assessment system.
· Fully developed evaluations that continually are reevaluated to establish optimum relationships in the evaluations.
· Systematic study of the effects of changes in evaluation procedures to assure that the intended program strengthening occurs and that there are no adverse consequences.
· Regular review by candidates and their faculty and supervisory staff, of performance data with a development of plans for performance improvement.
The Department of Speech, Lanugage, and Hearing(SLHS) Unit Assessment System addresses standards of the American Speech Language Hearing Association, which are the standards accepted by the Indiana Professional Standards Board for licensure in "Communication Disorders." The SLHS Unit Assessment System incorporates 1) criteria for Unit Assessment Systems, Purdue University Criteria for Unit Assessment Systems, and the 21 standards of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association.
Criteria for Unit Assessment Systems:
Criterion 1: UAS incorporates stakeholders in its development and management with an inclusion in the assessment document of the names of the stakeholders and their affiliations, structure for their involvement and a brief description of their continuous involvement in monitoring and modifying the formative evaluation system.
Criterion 2: UAS includes evidence that the conceptual framework(s) for the unit's programs incorporates all IPSB standards for the licensure area. The narrative should include: how and where the conceptual framework incorporates IPSB standards, how and where the IPSB standards are incorporated into the program, and the mechanism(s) used by the unit to assure that all IPSB standards are included in all programs.
Criterion 3: UAS includes a coherent, sequential, assessment system for individual candidates that include performance assessments that are shared with candidates utilizing both formative and summative performance-based assessments throughout the program.
Criterion 4: UAS uses the collective presentation of candidate assessments and
related data to document that the candidates meet the IPSB standards.
Criterion 5: UAS uses aggregated assessments from individual candidates and other sources to refine and revise the conceptual framework, and courses and curriculum in the program.
Criterion 6: The unit ensures that its assessment system is continuously managed.
Criterion 7: UAS provides for review and revision of the assessment system.