Standards Compliance Trends – 2021 Summary

In 2021, the CAA completed 76 accreditation application reviews of graduate academic programs (13 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 63 master’s programs in speech-language pathology). This total includes 13 reviews of applications for candidacy, 6 substantive changes, and 1 end of probation report.

The CAA also reviewed annual reports from 241 graduate academic programs (55 clinical doctoral programs in audiology, 186 masters programs in speech-language pathology).

Accreditation Decisions

The CAA’s 2021 accreditation reviews resulted in the following accreditation decisions:

• 45 programs were re-accredited for an 8-year cycle
• 4 programs were awarded initial accreditation for a 5-year cycle
• 13 programs were awarded candidacy
• 4 programs were placed on probation
• 1 program was granted a Good Cause Extension to continue probation
• 1 program was removed from probation and accreditation was continued
• 6 substantive changes were approved
• 241 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 for program noncompliance in 2021 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);
• 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).
• Documentation and tracking of student progress towards completion of the graduate degree and professional credentialing requirements (Standard 4.7).

Of note, there were 23 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 2021.

Annual Report Reviews

The areas (2017 standards) the CAA most frequently cited for program noncompliance in 2021 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).
• The program has adequate physical facilities (classrooms, offices, clinical space, research laboratories) that are accessible, appropriate, safe, and sufficient to achieve the program’s mission and goals (Standard 6.3)

*As in previous years, a little over a third of the programs submitting annual reports for CAA review in 2021 were cited for non-compliance under Standard 1.9 Public Information. 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). 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 mis-labeled on the program website). In nearly 20 programs, multiple requirements for review under Standard 1.9 were found to be out of compliance.

Also of note, there were 106 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 2021.