ACE Learning
ACE Learning
A fundamentally different approach to school accreditation
While traditional accreditation asks schools to focus on what they do for students, ACE Learning invites schools to reflect internally on what actually impacts learning. At NEASC, we define Impact as a long-term transformational change we wish to see in learners over time. Schools have often gauged their success as outputs like standardized test scores, university admissions, summative assessments, or similar forms of traditional academic achievement. NEASC encourages schools to expand their understanding of success to include impacts that describe the school’s highest aspirations for its learners — and encourages schools to look for ways to measure aspirational statements and design programs and structures to do so.
ACE Learning offers a framework for schools to reflect deeply on their 1) foundational structures and processes, and 2) their effectiveness as a learning community.
Being accredited on the ACE Learning Pathway:
- strengthens both the school’s Foundations and their approach to transformational learning
- focuses on the Impact of actions on student learning
- asks schools to work toward a “Shared Understanding of High-Quality Learning” using the ACE Learning Principles as a catalyst
- utilizes a transformational continuum to help schools think about effective change processes in their school
- helps schools identify drivers of change and barriers to change utilizing the 4 Cs (Conceptual Understanding, Commitment, Capacity, Competence)
While documentation (curriculum, policies, plans, procedures) is needed on a foundational level, the ACE Learning protocol prioritizes observation of learning and teaching over voluminous documentation that may or may not reflect what actually happens in practice. With ACE, the learning community’s energy is concentrated on defining, understanding, reflecting on, and embedding learning as its central purpose and goal. ACE invites all schools to reflect on how learning should illuminate the path to a better world for the next generation.
ACE Learning: Phases of Accreditation
The ACE Learning protocol entails several phases culminating in the External Review Visit (ERV) conducted by a team of trained peer educators that typically leads to accreditation for candidate schools or re-accreditation for member schools. Schools undergo a re-accreditation process every five years.
Once a school has demonstrated compliance with the Foundation Standards, they move on to imagine new ways of supporting deep learning, using the ACE Learning Principles as both guide and provocation. While exploring each of the Learning Principles, schools are asked to indicate where they are on the dynamic ACE Learning transformational continuum as they help shape impactful learning inside and outside the classroom.
Foundation Standards (report and visit)
The Foundation Standards are the compliance-oriented guidelines that indicate essential, transactional relationships, structures, policies, and systems without which a safe, effective, and sustainable learning community cannot exist. All NEASC schools must evidence strong foundations at the start of their accreditation journey and provide Annual Updates. A thorough review, supported by documentation and a Visit, is conducted every four to five years.
Preparatory Phase (Learning Principles; report and visit)
For schools who are seeking re-accreditation or those deemed eligible to pursue the ACE Learning Pathway during their first accreditation cycle, the ACE Preparatory Phase is the likely next step in the journey. At this point the focus in the report and subsequent visit shifts from the compliance-focused Foundation Standards to the developmentally focused core of ACE: the Learning Principles. As this shift occurs, the language of accreditation mirrors the shift by emphasizing a developmental and transformational process with learning at the center.
In keeping with the NEASC philosophy that “one size does not fit all,” there are several varieties of visits at the preparatory phase, such as whether the school is seeking accreditation for the first time and has recently successfully completed a Foundation Standards Visit or if the school is seeking re-accreditation. The size of the school community may affect the number of days, number of Visitors and type of report(s) that the school will submit. Furthermore, though most visits will be face-to-face, conditions may warrant a virtual visit, adding some additional complexity.
Internal Reflection (4 Cs; report)
The school’s Internal Reflection represents the core of ACE Learning. Following a successful ACE Preparatory Visit, the learning community commits to a year of self-reflection, which culminates in the learning community’s completing an Internal Reflection Report.
After the Internal Reflection Report has been submitted to NEASC, a team of trained peer reviewers will spend one week on site to conduct the External Review. The visiting team’s report includes a recommendation on whether NEASC accreditation should be granted.
The 4 Cs
A key element in each school’s reflection is how the 4 Cs support or hinder the realization of a learning community’s vision:
- Conceptual Understanding
- Commitment
- Capacity
- Competence
A learning community’s conceptual understanding of and commitment to the ACE Learning ecosystem as well as its capacity and competency for implementing change will be assessed during the External Review Visit.
External Review (report and visit)
A Visiting Team appointed by NEASC will spend a week with the learning community, engaging in a series of structured conversations to:
- verify the process and conclusions of a school’s Internal Reflection
- observe learning
- understand where the school is on the Transformational Learning Continuum
- review recommended actions from previous visits
- assess the 4 Cs
- prepare a detailed report with recommendations and guidance
Team reports are reviewed by relevant agencies and then sent to the school, with outcome decisions and next steps.
The ACE Learning Principles provided a framework to not just affirm the school’s practices in relation to its mission/vision, but to also provide research-based feedback to promote learning. This wasn't nearly as explicit during my involvement in team visits using previous re-accreditation protocols. For schools like ours, it provides research and support to change practices to better align with what we know is best for student learning.
— Ben Thrash, Deputy Head of School, International School of Helsinki