Program Assessment & Certification

ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CAREER PROGRAMS IN LAW, PUBLIC SAFETY, CORRECTIONS AND SECURITY

DEVELOPING NATIONAL AND STATE PROGRAM CERTIFICATIONS

In 2005 the Board of Directors of the National Partnership for Careers in Law, Public Safety, Corrections and Security decided to develop a process to certify the effectiveness of career programs nationally with variations for state needs. The general process and the assessment elements has now been completed.

I. The Purpose of Assessing the Effectiveness of Career Programs

Because there are multiple factors that affect the performance of students in education programs, most people agree that all factors that could impact program effectiveness, and thus student performance, should be assessed. With this in mind the National Partnership developed a comprehensive assessment that identifies strengths and weaknesses of career programs. The results of the assessment help program administrators and instructor determine areas in which improvements can be made. Just as importantly strengths of the program can be identified and used to market the programs and ensure that they remain strengths.

II. The Areas Assessed

There are five areas in which programs will be evaluated:

1. Support and Understanding of the Career Program
2. A Supportive Learning Community
3. Program and Curriculum Structure
4. Faculty, Staff, Parents and Volunteers
5. Student and Program Assessment and Improvement

There are a total of 45 assessable elements. For each element there is a rubric to provide for a range of points.

Example of one area with one of its elements and the rubric for assessment purposes:

Support and understanding of the career program

All career programs need to have clear and valued goals and missions. These then lead to support and understanding that are exhibited through various organization structures and actions

1)    A written statement of its education philosophy, mission and goals.  These are available to the administrators, teachers, students, parents, advisory board, and others involved in the academy in different forms. 

ABOVE STANDARD: 5-6 points	AT STANDARD: 3-4 points	BELOW STANDARD: 0-2 points	POINTS EARNED
The mission, goals and education philosophy are well defined including expectations of students beyond academic achievement, and specific roles of partners, administrators, counselors, partners and others.	The mission and goals of the program are well described, as are partnerships, curriculum sequence, involvement and the descriptions appear in different forms for a variety of audiences.	Little or no description of program exists other than courses offered and application instructions.

III. The Program Assessment Process

Because each program is unique, the National Partnership works with each school, school district or state to devise the best approach.

There are two basic approaches. They are:

For large systems: The National Partnership trains identified instructors and administrators to conduct the assessments. The primary value of this approach come from the learning derived from the experience. Because no one from the school system is assigned to evaluate his or her own program, those from other programs learn about the strengths of the programs they are evaluating.

This approach typically occurs through a three step process:

1^st --the National Partnership, provides 2-3 evaluators to work with 2-3 people assigned by the state or school system. Together they evaluate one or two programs on site;

2^nd-Those trained conduct one or two more evaluations with at least one National Partnership staff member as a consultant. Other members from the school system typically are selected to be trained as evaluators at this stage.

3^rd-The teams from the school system conduct all the on-site evaluations contacted the National Partnership for advice if needed.

For one or a few programs: Here the National Partnership conducts the on-site evaluations although the school system typically will assign one person to work with the team and provide basic coordination. This approach can save resources for the smaller systems or individual schools. The learning comes from the briefings and reports following the site visits.

IV. Typical Process

The following are typical steps that would be followed once a career program is identified for evaluation. The large system approach is used here as an example.

1. Working with all parties a date is selected for the on-sight visit(2-3 days). Typically a program should have at least a three month notice.
2. The team is selected.
3. The program receives a list of what it will need to provide prior to the visit and a list of what will be needed during the visit and who the team will want to interview.
4. A few weeks prior to the visit the team receives copies of the materials requested with a summary and analysis completed by the National Partnership.
5. Immediately prior to the visit the team meets to clarify assignments and responsibilities for aspects of the report of findings.
6. The team conducts the site visit.
7. At the end of the site visit there is a preliminary briefing to those previously designated to receive it.
8. A report of findings with specific recommendations is sent to those previously designated to receive it.
9. The national Partnership or some of the team can be available for face to face meeting related to the recommendations.
10. If the program meets a certain level of effectiveness the National partnership and or state will award a certification of program effectiveness.

For more information contact:

Joseph N. Coffee, Executive Director, National Partnership
703-470-2974
jnc11@msn.com

or

Allison Irby, Program Manager, National Partnership
airby@skillsdmo.com