In 2015, the CAA completed 45 accreditation application reviews of graduate academic programs (6 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 39 master’s programs in speech-language pathology), including reviews of applications for candidacy. Additionally, the CAA reviewed 1 substantive change plan, 8 annual reports referred for probation, and 7 end-of-probation reports.
The CAA also reviewed annual reports from 251 graduate academic programs (55 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 196 master’s programs in speech-language pathology).
Accreditation Decisions
The CAA’s 2015 accreditation reviews resulted in the following accreditation decisions:
- 33 programs were re-accredited for an 8-year cycle
- 2 programs were awarded initial accreditation for a 5-year cycle
- 7 programs were awarded candidacy
- 3 programs were placed on probation as a result of an application for continued accreditation review
- 8 programs were placed on probation as a result of an annual report review
- 5 programs were removed from probation and accreditation was continued
- 2 programs were continued on probation
- 1 substantive change plan was approved
- 251 programs were approved for continued accreditation on the basis of an annual report review
Accreditation status decisions (e.g., award accreditation, place on probation) are made public in accordance with the CAA’s Public Notice of Accreditation Actions policy. CAA’s policy and descriptions of those decisions can be found in the Accreditation Handbook—Chapter XII: Informing the Public.
Most Frequently Cited Standards
Initial and Continued Accreditation Application Reviews
The areas (standards) the CAA most frequently cited for program noncompliance or partial compliance in 2015 as the result of initial and re-accreditation application reviews included:
- Program strategic plan is developed, implemented, shared, current, and congruent with institutional mission and goals (Standard 1.3)
- Current, accurate, and readily available public information about the program and/or institution, including accurate student outcome measures, accreditation statement, and other program information (Standard 1.7)
- Overall faculty, including research-qualified doctoral faculty, and workload assignments are sufficient to meet program mission (Standard 2.2)
- Curriculum is systematically and regularly reviewed (Standard 3.2)
- Manner/amount of supervision commensurate with knowledge and skills of individual students (Standard 3.5)
- Documentation of policy regarding English language proficiency (Standard 4.2)
- Program assessment of student performance and development and implementation of remediation guidelines (Standard 5.1)
- Ongoing assessments of program effectiveness and use of results for program improvement (Standard 5.3)
- Sufficient support/technical staff (Standard 6.4)
Nine graduate academic programs received no citations (e.g., no areas of noncompliance, no areas of partial compliance, and no areas for follow-up) as a result of their initial or re-accreditation application reviews in 2015.
Annual Report Reviews
The areas (standards) the CAA most frequently cited for program noncompliance or partial compliance in 2015 as the result of annual report reviews included:
- The program develops and implements a long-term strategic plan (Standard 1.3)
- The program provides information about the program and the institution to students and to the public that is current, accurate, and readily available, including student outcome data, accreditation statement, and other program information (Standard 1.7)*
- The number of full-time doctoral-level faculty in speech-language pathology, audiology, and speech, language, and hearing sciences and other full- and part-time faculty is sufficient to meet the teaching, research, and service needs of the program and the expectations of the institution (Standard 2.2)
- Ongoing assessments of program effectiveness and use of results for program improvement (Standard 5.3)
- The institution provides adequate financial support to the program so that the program can achieve its stated mission and goals (Standard 6.1)
*Over half of the programs submitting annual reports for CAA’s review in 2015 were cited for partial or non-compliance under Standard 1.7. The majority of these citations were split between “inaccuracy of accreditation statement” and “incomplete and inaccurate student achievement data.” Remaining citations under Standard 1.7 included accuracy of other program information to the public, as well as the accessibility of program information.
Sixty-four graduate academic programs received no citations (e.g., no areas of noncompliance, no areas of partial compliance, and no areas for follow-up) as a result of their annual report reviews in 2015.