Standards Compliance Trends – 2020 Summary

In 2020, the CAA completed 41 accreditation application reviews of graduate academic programs (11 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 30 master’s programs in speech-language pathology), including reviews of applications for candidacy. Additionally, the CAA reviewed 3 substantive changes and 4 end of probation reports. The CAA also reviewed annual reports from 239 graduate academic programs (53 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 186 master's programs in speech-language pathology).

Accreditation Decisions

The CAA’s 2020 accreditation reviews resulted in the following accreditation decisions:

• 26 programs were re-accredited for an 8-year cycle
• 5 programs were awarded initial accreditation for a 5-year cycle
• 8 programs were awarded candidacy
• 2 programs were placed on probation
• 1 program’s probation was continued
• 3 programs were removed from probation and accreditation continued
• 3 substantive changes were approved
• 239 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 (2017 standards) the CAA most frequently cited programs for noncompliance in 2020 as the result of initial and re-accreditation application reviews included:

• 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 1.9);
• Curriculum allows each student to acquire knowledge and skills in sufficient breadth and depth to function as an effective, well-educated, and competent clinical speech-language pathologist (Standard 3.1B);
• Documentation and tracking of student progress towards completion of the graduate degree and professional credentialing requirements (Standard 4.7).

Of note, there were 17 graduate academic programs that received no citations (e.g., no areas of noncompliance and no areas for follow-up) as a result of their initial or re-accreditation application reviews in 2020.

Annual Report Reviews

The areas (2017 standards) the CAA most frequently cited programs for noncompliance in 2020 as the result of annual report reviews included:

• The program provides information about the program and the institution to students and to the public that is current, accurate, and readily available, including accurate student outcome measures and accreditation statement (Standard 1.9*);
• Faculty members are qualified and competent by virtue of their education, experience, and professional credentials to provide academic and clinical education; specifically, the majority of academic content is taught by doctoral faculty who hold the appropriate terminal academic degree (PhD, EdD) (Standard 2.3).

*As in previous years, a little over a third of the programs submitting annual reports for CAA review in 2020 were cited for non-compliance under Standard 1.9. Further, of the citations under Standard 1.9, almost half were for “inaccuracy of accreditation statement” (e.g., not using the CAA-specified language and components). While most of the other citations under this standard were for “incomplete and inaccurate student achievement data” (e.g., missing the most recently completed academic year’s data or mislabeled on the program website). Also of note, there were 108 graduate academic programs that received no citations (e.g., no areas of noncompliance and no areas for follow-up) as a result of their annual report reviews in 2020.