Response to APRC’s Comments and Critique of
Educational Leadership’s Spring 2014 Program Review
Submitted October 9, 2014
from
Educational Leadership
Chair: Dr. Suzanne Griffith
Counseling: Dr Carol Brown
Dr John Paul
Educational Administration: Dr Orv Clark
Ms. Terri Kronzer JD
Special Education: Dr Maryjane Burdge
Teacher Education: Dr Mary Churchill
Dr Mary Lee Nichols
Dr Brooke Grant
Dr Bhesh Mainali
Response to APRC’s Comments and Critique of
Educational Leadership’s Spring 2014 Program Review
Overview
The Educational Leadership Department has decided to prepare this response to the summer APRC Comments and Critique of our spring 2014 Academic Department Review of our various Programs in: Undergraduate Teacher Education, Special Education (Undergraduate & Graduate), and MSE and Specialist in Educational Administration.
As you noted, in 2013-2014 the Educational Leadership Department was not only involved in Strategic Planning and Program Prioritization of its 27 various programs but also had just completed its required major review with the WI Department of Public Education (DPI). This outside review has transitioned into an Annual Continuous Review Process (CRP) and is necessary for continuation of our accreditation and licensing ability. It requires “constant vigilance”: insuring that we assess our teaching and students’ learning and use the data to improve and fine tune our educational programs in an on-going manner.
Because of these other reviews and the (mistaken) impression that these other projects would delay the Academic Program Review we were admittedly caught-up-short by the need to prepare the APR Report last spring. Your Response states that the Review we provided did not sufficiently articulate reflections and descriptions of the topics that needed to be addressed. Last year was actually a year of extensive reflection and description required for the PPP on top of the CRP. We did the best we could under the circumstances. I think you will find that the Response that follows will provide additional reflection and description.
You will note from the responses provided that each programs has addressed your concerns. There are already many changes underway in the Department – all for the better. Thank you for your Review and your constructive feedback.
In order of presentation:
Counseling - pages 3-5
Educational Administration pages 6-7
Special Education – page 8
Teacher Education – page 9-14
Appendix
Counseling Program Response to Academic Program Review Council
We appreciate the strengths noted in the review in areas of assessment, outcomes, HIPS and long term strategic decision making. A few areas to further address were noted and are discussed below.
III. Other Distinctive Objectives
2. How does your Program determine your other distinctive objectives?
The review committee suggested more information about how the Counseling Program determines distinctive objectives. As previously stated, as they program grows and expands and courses are re-organized and re-developed, faculty seek opportunities to meet new, more comprehensive objectives. (i.e. the Introduction to Counseling course expanded its scope by requiring Academic Service –Learning). Additionally, it is important to note that three of the counseling tracks 1). School Counseling; 2). Clinical; and 3). Marriage & Family are required to meet the requirements of state licensure boards (i.e., Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services). Therefore, our distinctive objectives are guided by the requirements set forth by these governing boards. As these governing boards increase the requirements for becoming a licensed professional counselor (school, LPCC, or LMFT), the counseling program must also revise our program objectives to meet those standards.
One way that we strive to improve our program is by obtaining feedback from partners in the profession. All students on a licensure track are required to complete a minimum 700-hour internship. Students complete these internships in local schools, agencies, and mental health care facilities. Students have both a university supervisor and an onsite supervisor to assess their level of competence. As part of this process, on-site supervisors are asked to provide feedback about the readiness of our candidates and their ability to perform the roles and responsibilities of their position. Core faculty analyzes the feedback provided from the on-site supervisors and uses it to modify and enhance courses so students are better prepared for the rigors of the profession. For example, some of the feedback that we recently received from outside partners is that interns needed more training in report writing. To address this concern, we added curriculum in several courses that focused on improving writing skills and providing additional practice writing mental health reports. To evaluate this necessary skill, we added the requirement of a professional clinical report to the required portfolio for all students.
Additional ways of determining distinctive objectives of our program is to discuss learning opportunities with graduates who are now working within the counseling field. We have invited former graduates to be a part of our advisory team (I.e., Education Programs Advisory) as a way of receiving direct feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of our program. We are also in the process of collecting data regarding the professional placement of our graduates to assure that our graduates are acquiring jobs after graduation. We are also sending a survey to graduates to obtain additional feedback to guide future program development.
3. How are these objectives assessed and reviewed? Who is involved and how is their
feedback incorporated in readjusting the objectives or the processes that support them
· Student course evaluations
· Annual faculty tenure review
· Program faculty planning and review meetings
· Direct feedback from off-campus agencies
The counseling faculty and Educational Leadership Department take the student course evaluation process very seriously. We recently developed a committee to revise the Faculty Evaluations within the department in order to give students a more comprehensive opportunity to discuss strengths and weaknesses of courses taken. We not only review completed evaluations independently, but also discuss our evaluations in program meetings. We share both positive and negative evaluations to determine if any of the feedback might be relevant and helpful for consideration. We use the information to make individual course changes as well as potential program changes. Within our faculty tenure review we are also asked to discuss any negative evaluations we receive and devise a plan of action for addressing any areas of concern.
As stated previously, we also collect information from on-site supervisors, graduates, and professionals working with our students about the quality of our training program and areas of strength and weakness that are important for us to consider.
The review committee asked for us to address potential outside threats, for example the expansion of graduate programming at UMD. We believe that the most effective way to manage outside threats is to have a strong program that prepares students to become quality professional counselors. Part of bringing and keeping students in our program is the experience that they receive while they are here. The counseling program has worked hard to improve the quality of the program and the student experience in the past four years. Some of the ways the program has been strengthened is by providing quality instruction by professionals licensed in their area of expertise; developing core program objectives; developing program plans with all students with advisement and mentorship; developing a course sequence so students know when courses will be offered and can plan accordingly; developing an orientation for all new students; and encouraging student involvement in professional development through research, presentations, and involvement in our student leadership group.
By focusing on improving the quality of the program, the reputation of the program is increasing. This is evident in the number of graduates working in professional positions in the area and the increased desire of local schools and agencies wanting to place interns. While we have steadily been improving the program, it is also important at this time that the counseling program not make drastic changes that will lead students to question the solidness of the program. Our main focus has been rebuilding student confidence in the program and providing the best possible experience for our students. Part of the strength of our program is that we are able to provide individualized attention to our students within smaller classes. Smaller class sizes are important because often counseling course content revolves around sensitive topics and smaller class sizes allows students to open up and connect with colleagues and instructors. We have also taken the time to hire quality adjuncts who specialize in different professional areas as a way to enhance the program and give students knowledge and training they would not otherwise have received. Part of the strength of our program has been course flexibility, manageable class sizes, and summer offerings. It is important that program changes are made based on what is best for the students. If future decisions are based strictly on numbers and dollar amounts, we might lose the unique strengths of our program. In order to manage outside threats such as UMD, we have to keep our students content by knowing they are part of a solid and reputable program; they are receiving quality instruction, and they can depend on courses being offered and not cancelled because of numbers. Now is the time to invest in the counseling program and continue to improve the quality training and experience that students receive here.
The review committee also asked for additional information on the section on the human relations track. The degree is a general human service master’s degree. As described in our current catalog, “The Human Relations Track is designed for individuals who seek to work in nonclinical human service setting such as higher education, criminal justice, business, health care, and administration. Most students in Human Relations already are engaged in careers but want to upgrade their skills, explore other interests, or need an additional degree to reach the next level at their place of employment. Students gain an understanding of human behavior, group process, organizational/developmental dynamics, and effective methods of communication through counseling core courses. Before the end of their second semester, Human Relations students develop a plan of study with their advisor. The plan maps out and explains how the set of courses will prepare the student for her or his intended professional focus. The Internship course is taken during the student's last semester of study. 48 credits are required for the Human Relations degree. This is a non-practitioner degree; it does not prepare the student for certification, licensure, or the title of counselor.” This track uses currently offered classes and no increased staff or resources are required to teach it.
Some discussion of a possible school psychologist track was put forward. After additional review of the requirements necessary for this program, it is not feasible at this time for UW-Superior to pursue this degree. Addictions specialization was also put forward as a potential option. Given the structure of our current program, this may be a specialization that could be considered in the future to increase enrollment and student opportunities.
Educational Administration Response to Academic Program Review Council
APRC Comment
Declining enrollment is the main current challenge for the program. In 2003-2012, the program’s fall enrollment averaged 36 students per year (10-year annual average). In 2008-2012, the program’s fall enrollment averaged 30 students per year (5-year annual average). This reflects a nearly 17% decline in annual enrollment. The program believes this problem was caused by the elimination of bargaining rights for Wisconsin teachers’ compensation for graduate credits and is exploring ways to increase enrollment. For example, the program is considering offering online degrees to foreign residents in an International Business Administration program. Given the program’s recognition of the problem and ideas to increase enrollment, APRC recommends that the program starts implementing these ideas by working with the university’s marketing and international students departments.
EDAD Response
Recently the Marketing Office has assisted in the development of an advertisement for Educational Administration programs which will to be published every other month in a state organization magazine. With the upcoming employment of a marketing specialist for Continuing Education and Graduate Studies a formal marketing plan will be developed and implemented.
Educational Administration is launching an outreach recruiting program utilizing Educational Administration alumni as program liaisons to effectively increase enrollments and therefore graduation rates. Educational Administration is working with with the Admissions Office to provide recruiters with graduate marketing materials to distribute on their site visitations. Also Educational Administration professors are arranging to present at CESA 9, 10, 11 & 12 and state & regional administrative organizations.
Educational Administration has implemented a plan to address these challenges and to better serve the region. The plan includes new marketing materials, distribution of such materials during school district visitations, attending and networking with CESA’s regional and state administrative organizations. Discussions have been held with the Interim Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management about the graduate recruiting process and best practices. Also discussions with University Relations relative to establishing EDAD targets on web sites for administrative organizations and professional positions are under way. A next step is meeting with International Studies Staff relative to the feasibility of an International Educational Administration Program.
APRC Comment
Also, since the program offers some degrees entirely online, APRC recommends the program explore ways of attracting US students from other states, where teachers can be compensated for taking graduate courses. The program has indicated that private institutions are 30-50% less expensive than UWS courses (PPP report, p. 3). This may be the culprit of declining enrollment, as opposed to the elimination of WI’s teachers bargaining rights. If this is the case, increasing enrollment in the program may not be a feasible option. Thus, the department needs to objectively assess the viability of this program and related degrees.
EDAD Response
The Educational Administration program is the only DPI certified licensed program in the region and fills a unique niche in northern Wisconsin. The Educational Administration Program offers four areas of specialization at the master’s level and five at the educational specialist level that serve the northern region of Wisconsin and Minnesota. The EDAD Program is working with the other graduate programs in the Department to streamline curriculum and is considering how it might refine these tracks/offerings further.