• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Professional Educator Standards Board

A-Z Topic Index

facebook logoteal twitter iconyoutube logo
  • Home
  • Educator pathways
    • Educators of the Deaf and visually impaired
    • First peoples’ language, culture, and oral traditions certification
    • Alternative routes to teacher certification
      • Find an alternative route program
    • Becoming an educator
      • Find a preparation program
      • Find an endorsement offering
    • Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT)
      • RWT curriculum and resources
      • RWT reports
  • Current educators
    • Assignment
      • Educational staff associates
      • Endorsements
      • Teacher
    • Certificate renewal
      • Clock hours
      • Educational leadership
      • Educator standards, SEL, CCDEI
      • Equity-based school practices
      • Government-to-government relations
      • Professional growth plans (PGPs)
      • Providers for educational leadership and equity requirements
      • STEM integration
      • Suicide prevention training
    • Human resources
      • Educator conduct
    • District workforce data
    • Educator shortage
  • Preparation programs
    • Approval
      • Become a new program
      • Change an approved program
      • Course approval
      • Offer an endorsement
      • Propose a new specialty endorsement
    • Review
      • 27-month review
      • Curriculum and instruction review
      • Indicator-based review
      • Program review results
    • Standards and requirements
      • Educator assessments
      • Endorsement competencies
      • Field placement plans
      • Instructional topic requirements
      • PGP for program completion
      • Program standards
      • Role standards
  • Paraeducator program
    • District implementation
      • District reimbursement
    • Minimum employment requirements
    • Program components
  • Resources & reports
    • Reports
    • Data portal
    • Handouts
    • Online learning
    • Professional Learning
  • Innovation to policy
    • CCDEI standards
    • Equity initiatives
    • “Grow Your Own” Initiative
    • Innovation archive
    • Workgroups
      • Advancing equity workgroup
      • Computer science specialty endorsement
      • Educational interpreters for the deaf
      • Educator professional growth
      • Interveners for the DeafBlind
      • Professional educator collaborative
    • Grants & pilots
      • Advancing equity grant
      • Alternative routes block grant
      • Educational Interpreter Grant
      • ESD alternative routes grant
      • Expanding computer science for elementary educators
      • “Grow Your Own” Pilot Program
      • LEADER initiative
      • Multiple measures pilot for the edTPA
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers – Bilingual Educators Initiative
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers
      • Teaching equity grant
    • Legislative affairs
      • Legislative updates
  • About us
    • Contact us
    • COVID-19 guidance
    • News
    • Rule making
    • Strategic plan
    • Job opportunities
    • Board meetings
      • Previous Paraeducator Board meetings and materials
      • Previous PESB meetings and materials
    • Who we are
      • About the Professional Educator Standards Board
      • About the Paraeducator Board
You are here: Home / Preparation programs / Review / 27-month review

27-month review

Educator preparation programs are initially approved to serve and instruct candidates for 27 months. Before the 27-month period ends, PESB will conduct site visits to determine if the program is meeting compliance with state requirements. The quality and value of the program is determined by looking at the programs’ performance, design fidelity, standards, key performance indicators, and the ability to demonstrate continuous improvement.

PESB’s role

The Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB) ensures that Washington’s educator preparation programs are preparing diverse and classroom-ready educators. To do this, we regulate preparation program approval and review. Programs are approved if they have demonstrated potential to uphold standards and requirements, support local and state educator workforce shortages, and advance equity in educator preparation.

What are the review outcomes?

The review will produce the following information for program improvement and accountability:

  • Better understanding of program design, implementation, and outcomes
  • Opportunities for strategic input on preparation programming
  • An approval decision by the PESB board

Program evaluation questions

  1. How is the program being implemented relative to the design under which it was initially approved?
  2. To what degree does the programs processes and outcomes align with PESB educator preparation program standards?
  3. How is the program demonstrating outputs, processes, and outcomes?
  4. How is the program assessing performance to design, develop, and implement improvement initiatives?

What is the review process?

The 27-month review structure involves a collaborative review of evidence; a day-long, on-site review; and further examination of interview notes and additional evidence.

The review includes pre-review activities, the onsite review, post-review activities, and a presentation to the PESB board. Before, during, and after the site visit, the review team will use the following data sources to examine the program and make recommendations on each standard area:

  • Performance of program indicators. The review will include all available annual analyses of data provided to PESB by the preparation program. These data will include, but not be limited to, approved and piloted indicators.
  • Standards alignment. Program evidence demonstrating alignment with standards and state requirements will be compiled in secure, password protected, shared folders. Program providers, PESB staff, and review team members will have access to the files and review the evidence in two virtual seminar meetings prior to the site visit. Staff of the board will offer program providers guidance regarding the evidence required, how it may be gathered and used, and how it must be submitted.
  • Design fidelity. The review team and the preparation program will evaluate whether, and to what degree the provider of the program has implemented the program in alignment with the goals and design for which it was approved. It is understood that all program providers will learn and adapt programming based on experiences within the first two years of operation. A focus on design fidelity assesses how, why, and in what ways the program as-offered differs from the program as-approved.
  • Continuous improvement. The review team and the preparation program provider will evaluate whether and to what degree the program under review has demonstrated continuous improvement in its implementation and outcomes.

Review report

Following the site review and two virtual seminars, the review team will provide a report identifying any areas of practice in which program performance is out of alignment with standards and requirements. The program will have access to the report for three weeks, and will have the opportunity to make a response in writing. The program team and staff will present the report and response to the Board. Following the presentation, board members will discuss and make an approval decision:

  • Fully approve the program: the program would be reviewed under the indicator-based program review model
  • Re-approve the program under initial approval status: defined under 181-78A-110 and would trigger a 1-year follow up report, and subsequent board reapproval decision
  • Disapprove the program: defined under the revisions to WAC 181-78A-110 and 115

Who is the report for?

  • The Professional Educator Standards Board: The primary audience of the 27-month review report is PESB board members, who will use the report to make approval decisions. Board members will also use review reports to assess and further explore, quality and effectiveness of the state’s educator preparation system and make policy decisions related to standards, approval, and review.
  • The preparation program being reviewed: The 27-month review provides outside insight by focusing on critical areas of practice and highlighting promising approaches. The review addresses all areas of program standards, program leaders’ goals, and areas of practice identified through evaluation.
  • The field of educator preparation: Another key audience is the wider field of educator preparation. The review will identify and explore innovative and effective practices for the purpose of examining and sharing these practices.

What is the review schedule?

When new programs are initially approved, they are considered to be in limited approval status. The 27-month review takes place between a program’s initial approval and full approval. This time frame between initial approval and the 27-month review is considered one full review period.

Why 27-months?

Twenty-seven months is not an arbitrary amount of time for this proposed program review. After this period, program leaders will have experienced two annual academic cycles and will have submitted two annual cycles of program data. Review after two academic cycles with multiple years of data submission will be sufficient to provide insight into how programs are aligning with standards, outcomes, and the degree to which programs are operating as-approved.

Review date Program provider Location Review team
September 13, 2019 Educational Service District 112 – ESD-U Vancouver
  • Krissy Kim, Pierce College
  • Tara Haskins, Eastern Washington University
  • Matt Hoffman, Educational Service District 112
  • Sara Kaviani, Battle Ground School District
October 13, 2019 Pierce College – Teacher Preparation Program Fort Steilacoom
  • Melissa Matczak, Yakima Valley College
  • Shane Pisani, Seattle University
  • Bobby De Grouchy, Federal Way School District
November 13, 2019 Northwest Educational Development – Teacher Preparation Program Federal Way
  • Marisa Bier, University of Washington
  • Sharon Straub, Gonzaga University
January 21, 2020 Washington State University – Tri Cities Campus Alternative Route Teacher Preparation Program Richland
  • Mary Jo Larsen, Pacific Lutheran University
  • Patrick Sexton, University of Washington
  • Becca Anderson, Kennewick School District
  • Amy Salinas, Richland School District
Winter 2020 Grays Harbor College – Teacher Preparation Program Aberdeen TBD
Winter 2020 Centralia College – Teacher Preparation Program Centralia TBD
Winter 2020 Northwest University – Alternative Route Teacher Preparation Program Kirkland TBD
Summer 2020 Highline College – Teacher Preparation Program Des Moines TBD
Fall 2020 Yakima Valley College – Teacher Preparation Program Yakima TBD
Fall 2020 Antioch University – Alternative Route Teacher Preparation Program Seattle TBD
Fall 2020 Eastern Washington University – Alternative Route Teacher Preparation Program Cheney TBD
Summer 2021 Northwest University – Principal Preparation Program Kirkland TBD
Summer 2021 Lower Columbia College – Teacher Preparation Program Longview TBD
Summer 2021 Seattle University – Alternative Route Teacher Preparation Program Seattle TBD

Primary Sidebar

  • Preparation programs
    • Approval
      • Become a new program
      • Change an approved program
      • Course approval
      • Offer an endorsement
      • Propose a new specialty endorsement
    • Review
      • 27-month review
      • Curriculum and instruction review
      • Indicator-based review
        • Annual reporting
          • Data administrators
        • Teacher and principal program indicators
      • Program review results
        • Teacher preparation program reports
        • Principal preparation program reports
    • Standards and requirements
      • Educator assessments
        • Assessments resource hub
        • Basic Skills
          • WEST-B exemptions and equivalent assessments
        • Content knowledge
          • WEST-E/NES equivalent tests
        • Performance
          • edTPA coordinators
          • edTPA policy
      • Endorsement competencies
        • National standards and competencies adoption
      • Field placement plans
      • Instructional topic requirements
        • Issues of abuse
        • Paraeducator supervision and support
        • Since Time Immemorial (STI)
        • Social Emotional Learning (SEL)
        • Teacher and Principal Evaluation Program (TPEP)
      • PGP for program completion
      • Program standards
        • PEAB
      • Role standards

Footer

Seal of the state of Washington

Professional Educator Standards Board

Old Capitol Building
600 Washington Street SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7236

PESB@k12.wa.us
Paraboard@k12.wa.us

(360) 725-6275

STAY UPDATED

Sign up with your email address to receive news and event information.

Copyright © 2023 · Staff Intranet