Frequently Asked Questions



Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the purpose of Higher Education Accreditation?

a. The purpose of accreditation is to assure the provision of quality education, orientation and mobility, and rehabilitation services for children and adults with visual impairments.

b. Accreditation is granted based on demonstration of administrative and curricular standards established by AER.

2. Which programs are eligible for review?

a. Personnel preparation programs that prepare teachers of students with visual impairments, orientation and mobility instructors, clinical low vision therapists, vision rehabilitation therapists, or assistive technology instructors at a bachelors level (including certificates) or higher and who have been in existence for at least one year are eligible to apply for approval.

3. What “types” of review will be conducted?

a. The higher education review process consists of two components:

i. Review of Evidence of Compliance – The review is a standards review that consists of evaluating whether the program is providing an acceptable level of preparation regarding the standards for the profession.

ii. Interviews with faculty and students – This portion of the review verifies evidence from the materials submitted and answers questions that remain.

4. What is the structure of AER’s Accreditation?

a. The Higher Education review process involves three groups

i. University Review Panel

ii. Higher Education Accreditation Commission

iii. AER Accreditation Council

b. University Review Panel

i. Each University Review Team consists of 3 members of the University Review Panel who are assigned to review a program. Two of the members are university faculty and the first is a non-university member. Additionally, two of the members come from the same specialty as the program and the third is from a different specialty.

ii. The University Review Team reviews all materials submitted by the program and conducts interviews with faculty, candidates (students), and administrators.

iii. The University Review Team submits its findings to the HEAC below.

c. Higher Education Accreditation Commission (HEAC)

i. Members

1. Chair – AER Executive Director

2. Representatives of Consumer Organizations

3. Representative of Divisions

4. Representative of Universities

5. Representative of Adult Organizations

6. Representative of Schools

7. Members at Large

ii. The committee’s charge is determined by the AERAC but includes the development and review of standards, the creation and implementation of the review process, training of reviewers, considerations of challenges to the review decision, and other related tasks.

iii. Decisions are made based on consensus of the committee

iv. The committee makes recommendations to AERAC on policy as well as accreditation status of applicants.

d. Association for Education and Rehabilitation Accreditation Council (AERAC)

i. Members

1. Chair – AER Executive Director

2. Representatives of Consumer Organizations

3. Representative of Divisions

4. Representative of Universities

5. Representative of Adult Organizations

6. Representative of Schools

7. Members at Large

5. Who is responsible for establishing the standards for accreditation ?

a. The HEAC proposes all CORE and CURRICULAR standards

b. The AERAC approves all standards

6. What is the application process?

a. Format of Review Process – The review will include

i. a paper/electronic review of documents submitted by the program including

1. a completed application (Sections I-III)

2. a completes self-study of standards, including all supporting documentation

3. an application fee, amount to be determined by the AER board.

ii. One or more teleconference or other distance communication methods for gathering direct information from faculty, and students

b. Final Decision – University Review Panel will submit their findings to the HEAC with a recommendation for accreditation status. The HEAC will review the report and make a recommendation to the AERAC to grant or deny accreditation. This decision is independent of the AER Board.

c. Challenges to the review panel members

i. Programs may choose to challenge any reviewer on the review team

ii. Challenge process

1. Programs can request the replacement of any member of the review team due to a perceived conflict of interest.

2. Appeals to a reviewer must be submitted via email to the AER central office within 7 calendar days of notification of the review team members.

d. Appeals to the review process

i. Programs may choose to appeal the decision of the AERAC

ii. Appeals process

1. Programs wishing to appeal the decision of the AERAC must submit a written appeal via certified mail to the AER central office within 30 days of notification of the decision.

2. The appeal must contain the reason the program wishes its application to be reconsidered and any additional documentation to support the reconsideration.

3. The appeal will be forwarded to the AERAC who will appoint an independent committee to review all submitted materials and make a decision. The appellant may choose to participate in the meeting to present their case.

4. Programs that were denied accreditation may resubmit for a new review when they feel they have met all of the standards.

7. What “types” of accreditation will be given?

a. Levels -- Programs will be either accredited, conditionally accredited or not accredited.

b. If a program reapplies (after not being accredited) within 18 months there will be a financial “discount” (to be determined by the AERAC board) for re-application

c. Each re-application starts with a clean slate and a new review panel

8. How long will accreditation status last?

a. Programs that are fully accredited will maintain their status for five years assuming no major changes in the program are noted in annual follow-ups.

b. Annual follow-up –Accredited programs must annually complete and submit the University Preparation Program Update, a short yearly checklist. The HEAC will consider each update and determine whether

i. The program is maintaining standards and full accreditation is maintained.

ii. If violations of standards are found, the program has 60 days to rectify identified violations and file a revised report. Failure to do so may result in withdrawal of accreditation.

iii. If significant changes have occurred in the program, a full review is warranted to maintain accreditation status. If so, a full application must be submitted at least 90 days prior to the next AERAC meeting.

c. Disruption to programs – If a program ceases to exist for more than 12 months, the program must submit for review

i. If the program believes their program is re-opening without substantial changes, they can submit a continuing review. The review panel can accept the continuing review or request a full review packet.

ii. If the program believes there have been substantial changes in the program, they should submit a full review packet.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download