Current through Register Vol. 49, No. 13, September 23, 2024
Subpart. 1. [See
repealer.]
Subp. 1a.
Initial
unit approval.
A provider must apply for initial unit approval under the
procedures in this subpart.
A. The
provider must submit a notice of intent to apply for initial unit
approval.
B. Within one month of
the receipt of the notice of intent, board staff must schedule an informational
meeting with the provider to review the approval process and jointly agree upon
dates for the site visit.
C. At
least 12 months prior to the site visit, the provider must provide a
self-study, including evidence demonstrating compliance with standards, for
review.
D. At least one month prior
to the site visit, the provider must submit an interview schedule to board
staff.
E. The review team must
review the submitted self-study and supplemental evidence and provide feedback
on deficiencies at least six months prior to the site visit.
F. The provider may provide a supplemental
narrative and additional evidence to address deficit areas at least one month
prior to the site visit and may not provide additional evidence after this
time.
G. The review team must
conduct a site visit to verify evidence of current compliance with the
standards in this chapter, report their findings, and make a recommendation to
the board regarding approval status of the unit.
H. Within the written report of findings and
recommendations, the review team must identify each standard under part
8705.1010, as:
(1) Met: when the substance of
a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, and
interviews;
(2) Met with Concern:
when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental
evidence, or interviews, but the review team is concerned about ongoing
compliance with the relevant standards. The review team must provide a comment
on each standard that is "Met with Concern";
(3) Met as Planned: when the substance of a
standard is currently not met, but clear and convincing evidence of plans to
meet the standard prior to enrolling candidates is provided; or
(4) Not Met: when compliance with all or part
of a standard is not demonstrated.
I. Within one month of the site visit, board
staff must provide the written report of findings and recommendations to the
unit leader. Within one month of receipt of the review team's report and
recommendations, the provider may respond to factual errors.
Subp. 1b.
Board
determinations for initial approval.
The board must take one of the following actions based upon the
review team's written report of findings and recommendations.
A. The board may grant initial unit approval
for a duration of two years to newly approved program providers to launch
approved licensure programs and begin collecting candidate and program data.
The board may require the unit to submit an interim report during the approval
period to demonstrate compliance with standards identified as "Met as Planned"
and "Not Met" in the review team's written report.
(1) Upon written request by the unit, initial
unit approval may be extended for an additional two years.
(2) A unit with initial unit approval may
seek continuing approval by submitting a self-study once the unit has launched
one or more approved programs for at least 24 months. A review team must
conduct a site visit to verify evidence of compliance with the standards in
this chapter, report the findings, and make a recommendation to the board
regarding continuing approval status. The review team must identify each
standard according to the procedures in part
8705.1100, subpart 1a, item
H.
B. The board may
grant conditional unit approval for a duration not to exceed two years when the
nature and severity of "Not Met" standards threaten the viability of the unit
to prepare candidates for licensure. The board must identify standards that
must be met in order for the unit to achieve initial approval pursuant to item
A. A unit with conditional approval may not submit requests for initial program
approval (RIPA). If the unit has already submitted one or more RIPA, the review
process must be paused until the unit is granted initial approval pursuant to
item A. A unit with conditional approval may not enroll candidates.
(1) Prior to the expiration of the unit's
conditional approval, the unit must evidence meeting the identified standards,
which must be reviewed at a focused site visit specific to those
standards.
(2) If, after two years
of conditional approval, standards remain unmet, the board must act to
disapprove the unit and discontinue its programs.
C. The board must deny unit approval when the
provider's failure to meet the requirements and standards in this chapter,
chapter 8710, or Minnesota Statutes, chapter 122A, results in an inability to
prepare candidates for licensure.
The denial action must state the reasons for the denial. The
provider may not enroll candidates. The provider may resubmit a notice of
intent to apply for unit approval when at least six months have passed since
the date of the denial action.
Subp. 2. [Renumbered subp 1b]
Subp. 2a.
Continuing unit
approval.
A. Continuing approval is
valid for six years. A unit must apply for continuing unit approval to continue
to provide teacher preparation programs to candidates by scheduling an
informational meeting with board staff, jointly agreeing upon the dates for a
site visit, and following the procedures under subpart 1a, items C to
F.
B. The review team must conduct
a site visit to verify evidence of compliance with the standards in this
chapter, report their findings, and make a recommendation to the board
regarding the approval status of the unit. Within the written report of
findings and recommendations, the review team members must identify each
standard under part 8705.1010 as:
(1) Met:
when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental
evidence, and interviews;
(2) Met
with Concern: when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative,
supplemental evidence, or interviews, but the review team is concerned about
ongoing compliance with the relevant standards. The review team must provide a
comment for each standard that is "Met with Concern"; or
(3) Not Met: when all or part of a standard
is not evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, and
interviews.
C. Within one
month of the site visit, board staff must provide the written report of
findings and recommendations to the unit leader. Within one month of receipt of
the review team's report and recommendations, the provider may respond to
factual errors.
Subp.
2b.
Board determinations for continuing approval.
The board must take one of the actions in items A to D based
upon the review team's written report of findings and recommendations.
A. The board must grant continuing approval
for a period of six years when the unit demonstrates that the standards in part
8705.1010 are "Met" or "Met with Concern."
B. The board must grant continuing approval
with focus areas for a period of six years when one or more of the standards in
part 8705.1010 are "Not Met."
C.
The board must place a unit on probation for a duration not to exceed two years
when the nature and severity of "Not Met" standards threaten the viability of
the unit to prepare candidates for licensure. The unit is identified as "low
performing" for Federal Title II reporting.
(1) A unit on probation may not enroll new
candidates.
(2) A unit on probation
may not submit a request for initial program approval (RIPA) for new programs.
If a unit has already submitted one or more RIPA, the review process must be
paused until the unit is granted continuing approval or continuing approval
with focus areas.
(3) When placing
a unit on probation, the board must identify standards that must be met in
order for the unit to achieve continuing approval or continuing approval with
focus areas. Prior to the expiration of the probationary status, the unit must
evidence meeting the identified standards, which must be reviewed at a site
visit specific to those standards. If standards remain "Not Met" after two
years of probation, the board must act to disapprove the unit and discontinue
its programs.
D. The
board must disapprove a unit when the unit's failure to meet the requirements
and standards in this chapter, chapter 8710, or Minnesota Statutes, chapter
122A, results in an inability to prepare candidates for licensure. The
disapproval action must state the reasons for disapproval and provide a plan
for candidates currently enrolled to complete the licensure programs by a
specified date. A provider may not reapply for unit or program approval until
at least two years have passed since the date of the disapproval action.
Subp. 6.
Unit
review teams and expenses.
A. The
review team for site visits must be comprised of at least three representatives
for units and two reviewers for restricted units. The review team may include
active or former teacher educators, active or former teachers, and active or
former school administrators. The unit leader must provide input to board staff
regarding the review team membership. If agreement is not reached, or if input
is not provided, the board staff shall appoint the review team
members.
B. Expenses of the review
team members shall be reimbursed by the Professional Educator Licensing and
Standards Board as permitted under state law or rule. Other incidental expenses
incurred by the provider, such as those related to preparing reports, arranging
meetings, and providing workrooms, supplies, and hospitality for the review
team while on site are the responsibility of the provider.