Course number: CSAD 245S Internship: Special Day Class

Schools • Internship • Clinical

Syllabi Review Description and Reflection:

The current review was conducted on a facilitator-assigned course syllabus for CSAD 245S: Internship: Special Day Class. Course serves as an M.S. degree program requirement for speech-language pathology students in their final year of study. As the course is also required to meet a variety of clinical competencies and credentialing requirements, review of the course syllabus considered the stated learning outcomes and alignment with Knowledge and Skills Acquisition (KASA), California Commission on Teaching Credentialing (CTC) and Council on Academic Accreditation (CAA) standards.
Review of the current syllabus required refamiliarization with Quality Matters (QM) Specific Review Standards (SRSs). Although the QM course was completed successfully during the Summer 2025 term, the detailed QM rubric, standards and annotations needed to be revisited to complete the final review at the end of the Fall, 2025 term.

Once QM standards were revisited, it was a relatively straightforward process to apply the standards against the current syllabus for review. The primary challenges with completing the current syllabus review were associated with managing timelines, expectations around deliverables, and the various due dates. As the experience spanned across two semesters, it was a bit challenging to keep up with each component required for various entities (i.e., QM and the accompanying CSU platform, CTL and associated CSUS Canvas page, and academic department goals of a curriculum redesign). The syllabus review itself was straightforward as interpreting and applying the rubric and standards were thoroughly covered previously.

To ensure that the syllabus review was fair, consistent, and evidence-based, I utilized the QM Specific Review Standards (SRSs) and Annotations to assess how well the course activities aligned with learning objectives, as well as KASA, CTC, and CAA standards. While reviewing the course syllabus and becoming familiar with the associated course requirements, associated tools and activities, it was necessary to remain mindful of the fact that this was not a review or an evaluation of course materials or selected course readings, but a review of alignment.

Approach and Process Reflection:

A review of QM Specific Review Standards (SRSs) and associated Annotations (e.g., Specific Review Standard 4.1 – The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the stated learning objectives) was followed by an evaluation of the current syllabus for evidence of alignment with the standard. As the current review is within my field, I felt confident making adherence decisions as either met or unmet without the need to consult with an outside Subject Matter Expert.

As the current syllabus under review is an initial draft, there were items that were unavailable for review. For example, the course is a clinical internship experience, thus there is no assigned textbook. The syllabus includes a section identified as Textbook, Materials, and Online Resources however course materials are identified as “as assigned”. Course resources are noted as housed on the course Canvas page, including required readings and video content for the course. The Canvas was unavailable, and resources were not identified on the syllabus.
The development and review of course syllabi are a time consuming and lengthy process. This is especially true for graduate courses in a clinical training program that are designed and required to meet a variety of standards necessary for state credentialing and national accreditation (e.g., CTC, CAA, and KASA). Given the complexities of accreditation and credentialing standards in an increasingly complex and changing climate, it is especially beneficial for faculty to engage collaboratively in an evidence-based, process-oriented manner to meet the needs of the times. The CSAD Department’s undertaking of additional training and collaboration in this area has been worthwhile.
Utilizing Quality Matters (QM) Specific Review Standards (SRSs) to assess course alignment is a useful evidence-based approach that can be utilized for each of my courses. Start-of-the term syllabi preparation, particularly for courses I’ve taught for a number of years, can easily undergo spot checks for consistency. Focusing on even one improvement area each semester (e.g., consistent alignment with course objectives with newly introduced readings, resources, or class activities and discussions), can help ensure that the course maintains quality standards.

Course Syllabus

Course Syllabus

2026-fall-syllabi-CSAD 245S.pdf

Next Steps / Recommendations

Although timelines for the current learning experience were very tight, I found the QM content to be incredibly useful. In a department with a mix of full- and part-time faculty, generating department-level templates for all program syllabi appears to allow for increased quality control, supports part-time staff by reducing the burden of generating course syllabi on their own, and enhances student success by establishing department-wide standards regarding syllabi content and policies (e.g., instructor contact information, established office hours, AI and attendance policies, etc.). Next steps for our department include generating and revising additional course syllabi for increased alignment with contemporary content needs in the field of speech-language pathology.

**Faculty Bio**
	Dr. Aishah Patterson is an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders and joined the faculty at California State University in Fall, 2017. As a licensed speech-language pathologist, Dr. Patterson holds the Certificate of Clinical Competence (CCC) from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) and has therapeutic, diagnostic, and supervisory experience across the life span. Dr. Patterson teaches courses in voice and fluency, autism, medical speech pathology, and clinical methods.

Funding
	This work was supported by: US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project STEM4Equity P031C210012 *Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the US Department of Education.