Ensuring Educator Excellence

Commission on Teacher Credentialing

1900 Capitol Avenue Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 324-8002 Fax (916) 324-8927 www.ctc.ca.gov
Professional Services Division




October 9, 2014

Christine Zeppos, Dean
School of Education
Brandman University
16355 Laguna Canyon Road
Irvine, CA 92618

Dear Dr. Zeppos:

Thank you for your timely submission of your institutions biennial report. The Commission staff has had an opportunity
to review your submission and provides feedback to you at this time.

As you know, each institution is responsible for submitting aggregated candidate assessment and program effectiveness
data for all approved credential or certificate programs offered by the institution. The reports must include data for each
program approved by the CTC, an analysis of that data, and identify program improvements or modifications that would
be instituted to address areas of concern identified by the analysis of that data. Part B includes information from unit
leadership across all credential programs and revisions to this part of the report this past year were a result of discussions
held with the Committee on Accreditation over the last several years.

The Commission staff reviews each report submitted and provides feedback for your consideration. In reviewing the
reports, staff is looking for a few key components. Does the institution provide aggregated candidate data on 4-6 key
assessments for each credential area? Does the institution disaggregate the data based on delivery model to ensure that
key differences can be identified? Does the institution demonstrate that it uses assessments that are clearly based upon or
linked to competencies identified in the CTC adopted standards? Does the institution analyze the data and use the data to
make programmatic decisions? Did the program consider the feedback provided by CTC staff for its previous biennial
report submissions, if applicable, in developing this biennial report? Did the unit head closely review all reports and
discuss the results of program modifications?

Using these broad questions and others, the Commission staff provides comments for the program to consider. Please
note that none of the staff review comments are to be taken as an indication of whether standards are met or not met. The
information provided by your institution in the biennial reports will be maintained by the Commission. For those about to
begin the program assessment process, the biennial reports and CTC feedback are provided to the program assessment
reviewers for additional information about how your programs are meeting standards. In addition, the biennial reports and
feedback are provided to site visit teams as additional information to consider in making decisions on standards.

Biennial reports are a critical component of the accreditation system. Over the past few years, the Commission has
learned much about what makes for a robust, effective biennial report. The Commission would like to thank you for your
efforts in preparing your institutions 2013 report. If you have any questions about biennial report process, please feel
free to contact your accreditation cohort consultant at psdindigo@ctc.ca.gov.


Sincerely,


Cheryl Hickey
Administrator of Accreditation
Professional Services Division

Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Brandman University
Biennial Report Response, For Reports Submitted in Fall 2014

Cohort Color: Indigo

CAEP (No)


Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Multiple
Subject
w/intern
Data Presented
Signature Assignment:
-Tutoring Project
w/English Learners
-Thematic Unit Plan
Student Teaching
Evaluations
Teaching Performance
Assessments
Exit Surveys
Graduate and
Employer Surveys
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Professional Teaching
Portfolio
Surveys about Student
Teacher/Intern
experiences with Univ.
Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Multiple Subject program modifications.

The Commission understands that the N is small. For the next biennial report,
please consider disaggregating the data by delivery model (traditional, intern) to
understand whether there are any substantive differences in the data by delivery
model. It may be helpful to look at intern data across all locations given the small
N.
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Supervisors and
Master Teacher
Master Teacher survey

Single Subject
w/intern




Data Presented
Signature Assignment:
-Tutoring Project
w/English Learners
- Six Week Unit Plan
Student Teaching
Evaluations
Teaching Performance
Assessments
Exit Surveys
Graduate and
Employer Surveys
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Professional Teaching
Portfolio
Surveys about Student
Teacher/Intern
experiences with Univ.
Supervisors and
Master Teacher
Master Teacher survey

Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Single Subject program modifications

The Commission understands that the N is small. For the next biennial report,
please consider disaggregating the data by delivery model (traditional, intern) to
understand whether there are any substantive differences in the data by delivery
model. It may be helpful to look at intern data across all locations given the small
N.
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Preliminary
Mild
Moderate/Mod
erate Severe
Education
Specialist
w/intern
Data Presented
Signature Assignment:
-Language Assessment
and Intervention Case
-Progress Monitoring
Assignment
-IEP Meeting
Observation
Student Teaching
Evaluations
Exit Surveys
Graduate and
Employer Surveys

Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Professional Teaching
Portfolio
Surveys about Student
Teacher/Intern
experiences with Univ.
Supervisors and
Master Teacher
Master Teacher survey

Context

Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided and clearly presented.

It has been acceptable practice to combine Mild/Moderate and Moderate/Sever
program reports and data in Biennial Reports. Please be advised that the
Commission is adjusting that expectation for future reports and The biennial
report will require the submission of aggregated data for 4-6 key assessments for
each program. In your next biennial report, please include aggregated candidate
assessment and program effectiveness data both the mild/moderate and the
moderate/severe program.

The Commission understands that the N is small. For the next biennial report,
please consider disaggregating the data by delivery model (traditional, intern) to
understand whether there are any substantive differences in the data by delivery
model. It may be helpful to look at intern data across all locations given the small
N.
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Education
Specialist
Data Presented
Signature
Assignments:
-Assessment Report
Context

Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Education Specialist Level II program
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Level II -Career Plan
-Instructional
Development Plan
-Exit Portfolio
Exit Survey
Graduate Survey

Sufficient # of assessments
modifications
Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway
NA
Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

Preliminary
Administrative
Services
Credential
Program
w/intern
Data Presented
Signature
Assignments:
-Vision
Implementation Plan
-Employee Discipline
Document
-Staff Development
Plan
Fieldwork Portfolio
Performance
Assessment
Exit Survey
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Graduate Survey

Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Preliminary Administrative Services
credential program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided, it is
suggested that aggregated data from other sources be included such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.

The Commission understands that the N is small. For the next biennial report,
please consider disaggregating the data by delivery model (traditional, intern) to
understand whether there are any substantive differences in the data by delivery
model. It may be helpful to look at intern data across all locations given the small
N.
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Clear
Administrative
Services
Credential
Program
Data Presented
Signature Assignments
-Vision Statement
-Portfolio
* Exit Interview
* Exit Survey
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented

Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Clear Administrative Services credential
program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided, it is
suggested that aggregated data from other sources be included such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway
NA
Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

Pupil Personnel
Services:
School
Psychology
Credential
Program
W/intern
Data Presented
Signature Assignments
-Research Paper
-Assessment Paper
-Develop psycho-
educational report on a
student
Fieldwork Site
Supervisor Evaluations
Exit Survey

Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Professional Portfolio
Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Pupil Personnel Services: School
Psychology credential program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided, it is
suggested that aggregated data from other sources be included such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway
NA
Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Praxis Exam in school
psychology
Graduate Survey


Pupil Personnel
Services:
School
Counseling
w/intern

Data Presented
Signature Assignments
-Research Paper
-Small Group
Counseling
Curriculum Plan and
Presentation
Capstone
ProjectFieldwork Site
Supervisor Evaluations
Exit Survey
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented
Professional Portfolio
Praxis Exam in school
counseling
Graduate Survey

Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Pupil Personnel Services: School
Counseling credential program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided, it is
suggested that aggregated data from other sources be included such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.


Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway
NA
Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

California
Teachers of
English
Data Presented
Signature Assignments
Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported California Teachers of English Learners
Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
Learners
(CTEL)
-Comprehensive paper
-Thematic unit, SDAIE
lesson and unit
assessment
Exit Portfolio
Exit Survey

Competencies credential program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided, it is
suggested that aggregated data from other sources be included such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.

.
Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

Autism
Spectrum
Disorders-
Added
Authorization
Data Presented
Signature
Assignments:
-Resource Guide
-Case Study
-Exit portfolio
Exit Survey
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented


Context
Data, analysis, and program modifications were provided, clearly presented, and
well linked. Data and analysis supported Autism Spectrum Disorder: Added
Authorization program modifications.

While candidate assessment data and data from an exit survey are provided the
program may want to consider aggregated data from other sources such as survey
information from employers and post program surveys from completers. The data
from these can provide important perspectives on how well the program prepares
candidates for the districts it serves and indicate areas for possible program
improvement.

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies

Sufficient # of assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards


Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required

Education
Specialist
Added
Authorization:
Early
Childhood
Special
Education
Data Presented
Signature
Assignments:
-Family Case Study
-Curriculum Based
Assessment
-Consultation
Collaboration Project
-Individual
Infant/Toddler or
Preschool Intervention
plan
-Portfolio
Exit Survey
Assessments/Data
discussed but not
presented


Context
This program is new and so no program data is currently available. The
Commission appreciates the description of the assessments that will be used in the
new program. The Commission looks forward to the inclusion of aggregated data
for this program in the next biennial report.


Changes since last BR/SV
NA
Assessments tied to CTC
Competencies
NA
Sufficient # of assessments
NA
Aggregated data
NA
Disaggregated data by delivery
model/pathway
NA
Analyzed/Discussed data
NA
Modifications linked to data
NA
Modifications identified by
Commission standards
NA
Part B: Institutional Summary
and Plan of Action
Graphic/outline of unit
assessment system

The Institutional Summary indicates that leadership has reviewed the biennial
report information submitted for all programs. It demonstrates a thoughtful
review of each programs report and identifies areas of strength and areas in need
of improvement and identifies trends across programs within the institution.
Actions taken based on data and
analysis

Implications related to Common
Standards based on data

Submission of a Biennial Report for each approved educator preparation program is required as part of the Commissions accreditation activities but does not, in and of itself,

Fall 2014 Biennial Report
Program(s)
Candidate/Program
Data Submitted
Components
Evident/Meets Requirement
/- Present, but Insufficient
0 Missing/Not Evident
N/A Not applicable
Comments/Additional Information Required
imply that any of the Commissions Common or Program Standards are Met. The decision if each standard is met or not is the responsibility of thesite visit team.