Indicator

Undefined

Emerging

Meets Expectation

Exceeds Expectation

Description of selected area and rationale for selection.

Selected area is unrelated to any CAEP standard(s), components, or thread of diversity or technology.  The choice of the selected area is based on such things as faculty interest and expertise and is not supported by data from the self-study.  No baseline is established for future improvement.

Selected area is aligned to multiple CAEP standard(s), components, or thread of diversity or technology without identifying the relationship between the standards and/or components. The rationale provides general statements on the selection that are not grounded in data provided from the self-study.  Limited data from the self-study support the choice of the selected area as needing improvement and/or no baseline is established.

Selected area is aligned to CAEP standard(s), component(s), or thread of diversity or technology.  The rationale for the selected area is grounded in data from the self-study and supports the choice of the selected area as needing improvement.  A baseline is established for future improvement.

Selected area is directly aligned to specific CAEP standard(s), component(s) and/or thread of diversity or technology.  The rationale for the choice of the selected area is grounded in data from the self-study and is a natural extension of the data analysis. Data supports the selection of the area as needing improvement.  A baseline is established for future improvement.

Goals and objectives are identified and align with selected area.

Goals and objectives do not align with the identified selected area for improvement and are stated in vague, poorly defined terms. Stated goals and objectives do not lend themselves to measurement and simply define expectations or processes.  Potential to have a positive impact on the provider or its candidates is not addressed.

Goals and objectives are ill-defined and lack specificity.  Goals and objectives are identified, but marginally align with the identified area or limited to a few programs.  Goals and objectives do not identify the desired outcome or indicators of success making evaluation of project problematic.  Selected goals and objectives would not document a positive impact on the provider.

Goals and objectives are appropriate, specific and well-defined. Goals and objectives align with selected area, involve multiple programs in the provider, and are stated in measurable outcomes.  Desired outcomes and indicators of success are identified and have the potential to document a positive impact on the provider.

Goals and objectives are appropriate, specific and well-defined. Goals and objectives directly align with selected area for improvement, involve all programs in the provider, and are stated in measurable outcomes.  Desired outcomes and indicators of success are identified and have the potential to document a positive impact on the provider.

Strategies for intervention

General guidelines are presented for making program improvements.  No specific strategies, initiatives, or interventions are identified.  No timeline for achieving goals and objectives is provided.

Series of activities or initiatives are identified, but all lack clarity and specificity.  Identified activities or initiatives are only marginally aligned to selected area for improvement.  A general timeline is included, but lacks specificity.

Strategies, initiatives and/or interventions are identified and linked to goals and objectives for selected area for improvement.  A yearly timeline is included. Plan includes criteria for evaluation and monitoring of strategies and interventions.

Detailed description of strategies, initiatives and/or interventions is provided & linked to goals and/or objectives. Yearly timeline identifies goals to be achieved each year. Plan includes specific criteria for evaluation and monitoring of strategies and interventions.

Data collection and analyze

A generalized plan is presented for data collection, but lacks specificity and details.  No description is provided on how assessments were selected, how the process would be monitored, and how data were to be analyzed. 

 The presented assessment plan is underdeveloped and does not include how improvement will be assessed based on baseline data from the self-study.  Plan does not link back to goals and objectives.  A description for collecting, monitoring, and analyzing data is not provided. No description or rationale for selection of assessment is provided.

Includes an assessment plan to measure improvement based on baseline data from the self study. Plan is clearly described and assessments are linked to goals and objectives.  Plan for collecting, monitoring and analyzing data is provided.  A description of how assessments were selected is provided.

A detailed assessment plan is included that measures the amount of improvement in the selected area. Plan clearly describes how each goal and objective will be measured.  Plan for collecting, monitoring, and analyzing data is detailed and complete. A description and rationale for the selection of assessments were provided.

Capacity to implement and complete plan

The provider’s capacity to implement and complete the SIP is not apparent. No specific resources are identified.

The provider’s capacity to implement and complete the SIP is inconsistently defined.  No specific costs are identified in terms of staff time and/or other expenses identified with implementation and data collection.

 

Specific capacity resources are identified and described including cost associated with staff and faculty time, faculty expertise, and travel cost.  The provider’s capacity to implement and complete the SIP is documented.

A detailed description of specific capacity resources are identified and described including staff and faculty time, faculty expertise, travel and training cost, and other resources associated with data collection, monitoring, and analysis. The provider’s capacity to implement and complete the SIP is well-defined and documented.

Overall evaluation of the SIP

When reviewed as a whole, the proposal lacks specificity, clarity, and coherency.  While one or more areas may meet expectations, the overall plan is incomplete or inappropriate.

When reviewed as a whole, the overall proposal shows promise, but there are significant areas for improvement that must be addressed. These areas must be clarified or enhanced to meet expectations.

When reviewed as a whole, the overall plan meets expectations.  While there may be one or two weaknesses (lacks specificity, etc.), these weaknesses do not impact the overall SIP.

All components of the plan meet expectations and no weaknesses were identified.