Std 5 Printable PDF File


Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.

1. How does the unit ensure that its professional education faculty contributes to the preparation of effective educators?

While it has always been the goal of the unit to employ faculty who hold terminal degrees in their assigned areas of teaching, there are several exceptions where the unit employs faculty who do not meet this criteria and who were hired based on exceptional expertise and other qualifications. All resident unit faculty, including tenured and non-tenure-track faculty, are reviewed annually to ensure faculty are qualified (meaning they hold appropriate terminal degree and have relevant work experience). Faculty who teach particular content-related courses such as science methods and counseling typically hold undergraduate or graduate degrees in that subject matter content, or even both. Individuals who are on the faculty in tenure track positions without terminal degrees were, at the time of their hiring, outstanding educators from the public school sector. These individuals, for the most part, have continued their education past the master’s degree level with coursework at the doctoral level; however, they also hold a rank of either instructor or assistant with no opportunity to advance unless they complete their terminal degrees.

Part-time and adjunct faculty are required to have the appropriate degrees in the academic they teach. Employment of P-12 school teachers strengthens collaboration between the unit and our school partners provides an impetus for program development and improvement, and enriches the programs with pedagogy tied to the real world.

Spalding University adheres to regulations set by the Kentucky Education Professional Standards Board (EPSB). These regulations are related to the qualifications of cooperating teachers, and described in the College of Education Operations Guide. Unit data collected in 2009-2010 indicates that our cooperating teachers are highly experienced. In addition, our university supervisors are either retired administrators/teachers or mid-career teachers who have taken a break from full-time teaching for a variety of reasons. Similar to requirements for the cooperating teachers, university supervisors have a minimum of three years of teaching experience and have or have had relevant teaching licenses. All university supervisors also hold a master’s degree. In addition, the unit has ensured that one hundred percent (100 percent) of the part-time clinical faculty have had recent P-12 experience, and they hold licenses in their disciplines and appropriate grade levels. Adjunct faculty members receive considerable mentoring and support. The COE hosts an orientation for all part-time faculty each year.

Faculty members model the concepts they expect candidates to use. Just as all candidates’ units must reflect the state’s curriculum framework, unit faculty are required to include components of the conceptual framework and a description of how course goals and objectives are related to the framework. The conceptual framework and the rubrics that reflect the framework are frequently discussed in various faculty meetings of the unit where faculty members are able to share how they incorporate these standards into their courses. Our faculty have an in-depth understanding of assessment, technology and use of multiple forms of assessment in determining effectiveness of their instruction.

The faculty models best professional practices as evidenced by their use of a variety of assessment methods, including performance assessments that measure candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Assessment strategies employed by full-time and adjunct faculty are also included in each syllabus and have been further described in response to Standards 1 and 2 of this report. In addition, unit faculty are fluent in the use of the internet and identification of internet resources and technologies to help candidates find, evaluate, and process information; solve problems; communicate ideas; work collaboratively; and learn how to learn. The use of information and communications technologies are enabling unit faculty to rethink and re-adjust the nature of their teaching and learning practices. Faculty utilizes LiveText which has become a unit’s required technology tool incorporated into professional education courses since spring 2009 when the unit, with funding from the University, fully adapted the technology.

Faculty encourage the development of reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions and draws from their own practice as faculty to reflect as required by the University’s policy which articulates that:

The annual evaluation process is designed to allow an opportunity for each faculty member to reflect upon his/her accomplishments and areas for future growth and the corresponding impact upon the University. Each full-time and proportionate-time faculty member is required to participate in the faculty evaluation process. (Faculty Handbook and Part-Time Faculty Handbook, p. 20)

Faculty also place this expectation on themselves. Over the last few years, faculty in the college have expanded the notion of reflective inquiry beyond the narrow focus of their research or their teaching. Unit faculty, individually and collectively, have come to learn that they must try to reflect and inquire about the profession and the curriculum as a whole. The unit’s score card plays a major part in the evaluation of the dean by the provost. The dean of the college develops the score card and links the identified goals and activities to the overall needs of the unit. In the last three consecutive years, the dean of the college has included identified professional development needs in the annual ScoreCard process.

Naturally, unit faculty have come to believe that their candidates should also be engaging in reflective inquiry. To that end, faculty have structured their courses and practica expectations to facilitate a reflective habit from candidates.

Unit faculty members consistently use a variety of teaching techniques blended with multiple forms of assessment that are used in both formative and summative evaluations. Individual course syllabi would show a wide array of instructional strategies engaged in by candidates including poster demonstrations, web searches, real-life scenarios, student panels, simulations, videotaped presentations, and in-service plans. Cooperating teachers, through training, gain insights on ways to help candidates recognize the implementation of effective teaching strategies through modeling.

All faculty (temporary, regular part-time, probationary, non-tenured, tenured, and applicants for promotion) must be successful in three areas: effective teaching and fulfillment of professional responsibilities, continuing scholarly growth, and service to the university and community. In addition to course evaluations are conducted for each course taught, peer observations are encouraged to assist faculty in reflecting on their own teaching and suggestions are made for improvement as appropriate. Faculty members also engage in self-assessment through written self-evaluations that precede annual evaluations with division heads. These self-evaluations are partially based on feedback from candidates’ course evaluations and from student teachers’ evaluations of their university supervisors.

The unit supports an understanding of scholarship within Ernest Boyer’s model which embodies the primary work of the professoriate: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. In addition, the unit encourages faculty to conduct research and disseminate findings to a scholarly audience (and) provide leadership to learned societies in education. The unit faculty demonstrates intellectual vitality in their sensitivity to critical issues. Examples of such engagement and achievement include refereed presentations and publications, funded major research, and leadership in major professional associations. The unit believes that the integration of the professorial functions of a faculty member is intended to create synergistic outcomes for our students, P-12 teachers and their students and the body of knowledge in individual faculty disciplines.

To increase efficacy and performance, all unit faculty members are reviewed each year. The cycle for evaluation begins with a faculty member gathering artifacts. These artifacts typically include their own self-evaluation and reflections of teaching, scholarship, and service, student evaluation of teaching, course documents related to curriculum and assessment, and other scholarly products (such as web sites, power point presentations, as well as journal articles and books). In 2009-2010, the university modified the annual faculty evaluation process from a calendar cycle to an academic year. The faculty annual evaluation is staged process that begins with the faculty engaging in a reflective exercise, completion of the evaluation summary form, development of the professional growth plan, an update of the faculty vita using the university’s approved vita format, submission of the documents to the immediate supervisor, conference with the supervisor prior to a review and signature by the dean, and finally a review and signature from by the University Provost. Faculty annual evaluation summary data for the 2007, 2008, and 2009-2010 evaluation cycles for the following three categories: (a) teaching, (b) scholarly activity, and (c) service ranged from “performance meets unit/university expectations” to “performance exceeds academic unit/university expectations.” A majority of ratings observed at “exceeding” and “exceeds expectations” ranges. It is clear from reviewing these data across a three-year period that faculty members performances across programs are consistently in the highest two categories.

In addition, all courses serviced by the unit continue to receive formal evaluation to provide evidence of teaching performance. The primary goal of the evaluations is to improve teaching, scholarship, and service. After each semester has ended, faculty receives copies of aggregated data of course evaluation and where written comments are given, these are also attached. These evaluations lead to course and program evaluation and revision, and they serve as a key benchmark in faculty growth and program consistency. In addition, course evaluation data is a required component for each individual faculty members’ annual review.

The university is very clear that “Continuing professional development of all teaching faculty at Spalding University is the shared responsibility of the University and the faculty colleague” (Faculty Handbook, p. 23).  Unit faculty are keenly aware of the expectations that they continually improve their knowledge and abilities as educators. The NCATE accreditation self-study process has brought additional opportunities for professional development, particularly in the areas of performance assessment and data use for program improvement.

The unit supports professional development activities that engage faculty in dialogue and skill development related to emerging theories and practices. In March 2009, the College of Education has sponsored and hosted a major LiveText regional workshop on the use of work samples for assessment and development of rubrics and scoring tools. Spalding faculty, as well as faculty from other in  Kentucky attended the workshop.

2.   Please respond to 2a if this is the standard on which the unit is moving to the Target Level.

a. Standard on which the unit is moving to the Target Level

Unit has not selected Standard 5: Qualifications, Performance, and Development as standard to move to Target Level in this cycle.

b.   Continuous Improvement

Since the previous NCATE visit of 2003, unit faculty continued to provide exemplary service by consulting with teachers and school administrators to determine school needs. Our entire professional education faculty base of 13 is a part of an ongoing dialogue between Spalding University and JCPS in the restructuring of Maupin Elementary School. In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 each of our faculty members was a part of a committee at Maupin Elementary School. Other examples of service include individual faculty member serving as consultants in schools. Within the unit, within the university, and within the larger education profession, faculty are increasingly involved in collaborative activities with varied constituencies. The effect of this trend has been to expand the scope of expertise represented in our preparation programs, which simultaneously influences the quality and effectiveness of P-12 student learning. This trend also connects individual faculty research and service activities more productively to the world of practice. Our ultimate goal is to enhance educational practice and improve educational systems. To accomplish this, or faculty members consistently collaborate with our students, K-12 professionals and other education stakeholders to investigate important educational issues in an effort to impact student learning.

In many instances these consultations may lead to mentoring in schools, assisting teachers with National Board Certification applications, or providing P-12 staff development activities. One faculty member has extended his research on project-based learning using hydroplane development, testing, and competition to several area schools. In 2009, the 3rd Annual Doug McIntosh Memorial Regatta, an event founded by the faculty member, featured a colorful display and event of racing hydroplanes crafted as part of the project. Our faculty members collaborate on a regular basis with our colleagues in P-12 setting in program development as well as professional development. An example of program development includes the recently redesigned principal preparation program and the teacher leader master’s program with Maupin Elementary School faculty. In both program redesign proposals, our unit faculty worked in close collaboration with P-12 teachers, principals, and central office personnel to develop programs that are responsive to the needs of students and particularly those in urban and diverse settings. In August 2009 and 2010, the unit held combined faculty development programs. In 2009, the day long program held at the Louisville Zoo focused on selectively implementing the concept of multiple intelligences in planning for teaching as a way to support student learning, particularly for professionals  in diverse school environments. In August 2010, the focus was on project based learning.

Our unit faculty have embraced the partnership with Maupin Elementary School and have collaborated in direct teaching of P-5 students. As an example, during this reporting cycle, Dr. McGurl[1] actively engaged Maupin students in extended-day activities focused on problem solving. Using puppets, Dr. McGurl engaged Maupin students in discussions and analysis of life-related scenarios. Students are encouraged to search for creative responses to the situations and identify their own possible solutions. In summary, the development of Maupin Elementary School as a professional development school [PDS] has enhanced the responsiveness of the unit to diversity and has increased awareness of the possibilities for future partnerships with other local school districts and schools.

Another area that is reflective of the unit’s effort for continued improvement has be in engaging faculty in professional development that offer opportunities in the development and use of assessment instruments.  In fall 2009, for example, the Dean encouraged all unit faculty to attend a Stiggins’ daylong regional assessment seminar examining formative “assessment for learning” – a concept that deviates from the traditional approach to “assessment of learning.” This experience offered faculty an opportunity to gain understanding in the use of multiple forms of assessments to improve practice (Target Standard 5 Element b).  Another example includes continued opportunities during the spring and fall 2009; spring and fall 2010 when various cadre of faculty participated in regional LiveText user group professional development conference to gain an understanding of assessment and technology (Target: Standard 5 Element b)

3. Exhibit Links

[1] Dr. Mary Kay McGurl is no longer on the faculty.