Assessment and Compliance Committee of the Educator Preparation Governing Council
Dispositions Subcommittee Meeting Minutes of 7/8/2014
Committee Members Present: Marcia Fetters, Kathy Hillenbrand, Linda Powell, Selena Protacio
Charge from ACC: to create a means of evaluating and documenting professional disposition-related concerns faculty observe in students.
Points of Discussion
The Charge from ACC
Determined that what is most important is developing a means of identifying and documenting student concerns that is easy for faculty to use, ensures review of the data collected, and ensures follow-up action. Without this faculty may not invest in the project, and the desired outcomes will not be achieved.
Protocol for Evaluating Professional Dispositions
Marcia distributed a single-sided adaptation of the Candidate Professional Dispositions and Skills Audit used by Woodrow Wilson Teaching Fellowship program, and distributed the InTASC teaching standards. Subcommittee decided that the form used for Woodrow Wilson program is a good model for evaluating/documenting concerns in CoEHD students. Decided that committee would work on adapting this form over email over the next few weeks, working to make the wording objective/measurable and the form easy and quick to complete (i.e., keeping it one-sided). Marcia will send the form to members electronically for feedback.
Process for Evaluating Professional Dispositions
Discussed need for students to have paper copy of evaluation protocol at beginning of each CoEHD class, so expectations are clearly communicated to each student across all CoEHD classes. At midterm students could be given 5-10 minutes of class time to self-evaluate the degree to which they meet the disposition expectations. Faculty would report initial concerns at mid-term using a quick “concern/no concern” survey (using class list?); if there’s a discrepancy between student self-evaluation and faculty report, student and faculty member would need to meet. At the end of the semester faculty member would complete the one-page disposition protocol, providing more detailed information regarding concerns at end of semester.
Subcommittee determined that having an electronic reporting system for faculty which would trigger use of the quick “concern” form and completion of the one-page disposition likely would be most reliable method for getting evaluations. Discussed tools for sending electronic surveys: TracDat, Degree Works, Survey Monkey, Zoomerang, etc. Linda and Selena will make contacts re: survey tools currently used on campus, to determine potential options for getting mid-term “concern” form and end-of-semester protocol to faculty.
Process for Managing Evaluation Data
Discussed the need to collect and summarize data that is not personnel-intensive and is quickly/easily reported and distributed. Thought that an office assistant in each dept could set up delivery of surveys with class lists to faculty at midterm and at end of semester, and could generate and house reports of the survey data.
Once survey reports are generated, a mandatory meeting of faculty (e.g., pre-internship coordinator, field placement coordinator, academic advisors (?) etc.) needs to occur each semester, to review department reports and discuss the concerns reported. As concerns may be reported for a particular student across more than one department, it is important that a representative of each department attend this meeting. Discussed that a formal policy /procedure must be established regarding follow-up of faculty concerns; i.e., a student with one faculty concern may not need to be discussed, but a student with at least three (?) faculty concerns requires follow-up conference with the student.
Next Actions
Subcommittee will use email modify Candidate Professional Dispositions and Skills Audit
Subcommittee will use email to share info/recommendations re: survey tools
Subcommittee will hold a formal meeting, if needed, before providing recommendations to ACC
Respectfully,
Kathy Hillenbrand