In 2019, the CAA completed 47 accreditation application reviews of graduate academic programs (5 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 42 master’s programs in speech-language pathology), including reviews of applications for candidacy. Additionally, the CAA reviewed 1 annual report referred for probation, 2 substantive change requests, and 1 end of probation report. All reviews were based on 2017 Standards for Accreditation.
The CAA also reviewed annual reports from 242 graduate academic programs (56 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 186 master’s programs in speech-language pathology).
The CAA’s 2019 accreditation reviews resulted in the following accreditation decisions:
- 35 programs were re-accredited for an 8-year cycle
- 6 programs were awarded initial accreditation for a 5-year cycle
- 5 programs were awarded candidacy
- 1 program was removed from probation and accreditation was continued
- 2 programs were placed on probation (one as a result of an annual report review)
- 2 substantive change requests were approved
- 242 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. The 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 CAA most frequently cited programs for noncompliance or partial compliance in 2019 as the result of initial and re-accreditation application reviews on the following requirements:
- Strategic plan development, including measurable goals & objectives (Standard 1.5)
- 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)
- Policies & procedures for students needing intervention (Standard 4.3)
- On-going formative and summative assessment (Standard 5.2)
- Sufficient access to clerical and technical staff (Standard 6.6)
Of note, there were 24 graduate academic programs that 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 2019.
Annual Report Reviews
The CAA most frequently cited programs for noncompliance or partial compliance in 2019 as the result of annual report reviews on the following requirements:
- The program develops and implements a long-term strategic plan (Standard 1.5)
- 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)
- The CAA’s established threshold requires that at least 80% of students must have completed the program within the program’s published time frame (number of academic terms), as averaged over the 3 most recently completed academic years (Standard 5.5)
*Similar to previous years, almost a third of the programs submitting annual reports for CAA review in 2019 were cited for non-compliance under Standard 1.9. Further, of the citations under Standard 1.9, the majority were for “inaccuracy of accreditation statement” (e.g., not using the CAA-specified language and components). There were also many citations 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 137 graduate academic programs that 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 2019.