The Teacher Education Advisory Council facilitates cross-campus collaboration with the 24 arts and sciences departments in which our candidates major and minor. This collaboration is critical to candidate success and program quality. Composed of representatives from the unit and the arts and sciences, the Council meets at least once each year to discuss issues affecting candidate preparation. Records from the past five years show agenda topics such as admission requirements, performance assessment, candidate dispositions and professionalism, state test scores, NCATE accreditation, and SPA program submissions. Personnel from the College's Office of Administrative Services meet regularly with arts and sciences faculty to advise on new programs and approval of existing programs. Unit faculty and arts and sciences faculty are also active in discussions with state representatives on specialty program standards and requirements. (See Collaborative Activities)
All new programs and revisions seek approval from the University Curriculum Committee and other relevant governance bodies. The unit is represented on all these bodies along with representatives from other Colleges. (See University Governance)
Leadership in the Unit
Under the leadership of Dean Collins, six units within the College work together to ensure that candidates meet standards and the unit carries out its professional and community responsibilities. Faculty in the three academic units of Curriculum and Instruction, Foundations and Technology, and Leadership and Human Services oversee all courses, field and clinical experiences, research projects, additional endorsement programs, degree programs, and certification requirements. Faculty and staff in the three administrative units of Student Information and Services, Community Outreach, and Administrative Services supervise student services and advising, develop community outreach activities and partnerships, and oversee internal and external policy and program requirements. The Dean's Leadership Team meets every other week to ensure that the unit continues its characteristic spirit of collaboration. Current members of the Leadership Team are the six unit heads, three faculty governance chairs, and the faculty liaison for NCATE accreditation. (See Unit Organization)
Beginning in 2002, the unit undertook a thorough review of unit governance policies and practices to establish or clarify voting procedures, personnel roles, and guidelines for promotion, tenure, reappointment, course assignment, course release, and unit membership. New bylaws established the College Assembly, which includes all tenured, tenure track, visiting, and affiliate faculty, along with all professional staff and office staff. The Faculty Council became the governance body for tenured and tenure track faculty, with two standing committees: Unit Personnel and Curriculum and Standards. (See Unit Governance)
In the 2005 fall semester, the Faculty Council moved forward to develop a plan for curriculum review and possible restructuring of academic units. Two representatives from each academic unit, plus the chair of Faculty Council and the Dean comprise the Reorganization Task Force. A series of open meetings began in December 2005 and will continue throughout the academic year.
Fair and Consistent Policies and Practices
Responsibilities of the Administrative Services Office cross every aspect of College operations. The office serves as the first line of communication with the state on policies and program requirements; oversees preparation of consistent unit materials, catalog, and website; assists with and maintains records on curriculum approvals and revisions within the unit and across the university; meets federal reporting requirements; is responsible for developing databases and generating reports; and oversees all aspects of assessment, accreditation, and program review. In many respects, the Office of Administrative Services is the unit's central intelligence function.
Services to Students
If Administrative Services is the unit's "head," its heart is the Student Services and Information Center. The Center is the welcoming point for visitors to the College and serves virtually every candidate in the unit through the admission, advising, field placement, and certification functions. Operational since 2002, it is staffed by a faculty member/Director, 6 professional staff, 4 office support staff, and a graduate assistant. Records show that the Center received nearly 50,000 calls and walk-ins during the last academic year.
Center staff meet with candidates by appointment or walk-in, individually or in groups, by telephone, e-mail, or in person. They make group presentations for potential candidates, transfer students, candidates seeking admission, newly admitted candidates, and candidates nearing completion. They work with special populations such as community college, minority, and post-baccalaureate candidates; provide "brown bag" advising updates for faculty; coordinate with other advising centers across the university; and travel to distant sites and recruitment events on behalf of the College. The Center is a gathering point for admission functions, receptions, open houses, and community potlucks for faculty and staff.
The Center's emphasis on community and collaboration is also evident in their professional contributions to the field of student services. In 2005 the staff was invited to the National Conference on Academic Advising to present Full Service Student Information and Services: A Collaborative Model. In the 2006 winter semester Academic Advising Today will publish the article, Student Workers Add a Student Perspective.
Candidate Evaluations of Programs and Services
A unit-wide assessment that has not yet been addressed in this report is the Evaluation of Programs and Services. Although it crosses many standards, it is most clearly related to Standard 6 and its emphasis on the unit within the university. We believe it confirms an issue that has been problematic for some time and suggests some possible solutions.
The assessment functioned as a broad-based exit survey and was given to candidates in their final course (Initial clinical practice or Advanced research project). The evaluation asked about these five categories and items within.
- Processes (admission, advising, field placement, certification services)
- Scheduling (course availability, course sequencing, course times and locations)
- Faculty/Staff (major/minor advising, Education advising, SISC, other office services)
- Professional Programs (course quality, field/clinical quality, faculty helpfulness)
- University Services (library, research, technology, KCRC, career placement, Records)
Evaluation of Programs and Services (Initial, Advanced)
Evaluations for the most part were in the average and above average ranges. However, it was clear that Initial candidates were consistently less positive about their experiences than Advanced candidates were, and this was cause for concern. As we examined results more carefully, it became apparent that the differences were not so much between Initial and Advanced programs as they were between the two Initial programs, Teacher Education and Graduate Teacher Certification. The next chart disaggregates the results and shows that the low ratings came mostly from Initial Teacher Education candidates, not from all Initial candidates.
Evaluation of Programs and Services (Advanced, GTC, Teacher Education)
A third chart shows the lowest-ranked of the 19 sub-items:
Evaluation of Advising, Placement, and Other Services
For Teacher Education candidates, areas that include advising and information services have been problematic for some time. The College has put considerable energy and funding into trying to correct the problem-or the perception-but without significant results. Applicants and arts and sciences faculty contend that it is difficult to get consistent, reliable information.
We believe (and the data suggest) that the problem is not with poor advising but rather with unintended consequences stemming from a bifurcated university advising system. Because the university classifies candidates by their academic major, "official" advising occurs in the arts and sciences rather than in Education, even on matters of Education admission and procedures. Furthermore, because there is no reliable way to identify pre-Education candidates, there is almost no contact between candidates and the College of Education until the time of application, typically during a candidate's junior year.
Despite valiant efforts by many arts and sciences faculty to stay abreast of numerous College procedures, courses, and state certification requirements, the expectation that they can do so is probably unreasonable. Add to this the College's recent move away from the Allendale campus where arts and sciences programs are housed, and the scope of the problem becomes apparent. By contrast, the system for Advanced and Graduate Teacher Certification candidates dictates that they have direct and immediate contact with Education faculty. We believe that this system results in higher quality experiences and higher quality preparation for candidates.
One of the unit's goals for the near future will be to work together with the university and the arts and sciences to devise methods that will link candidates with the College from the time of first enrollment in the institution. We believe that correcting the difficulties that stem from the current advising system will be one of the most important improvements that can be made to unit operations.
Back to top
|
