April 4, 2007 CEPC Meeting
In attendance: Kay Moore, Gerald Ponder, Ruie Pritchard, Barbara Parramore, Stan Baker, Karen Hollebrands, Susan Osborne, Jeffrey Reaser, Carol Pope, Lance Fusarelli, Alan Reiman, Kevin Hill, Jack Wheatley, Terry O’Brien, Jim Haynie, Toby Brody, Scott Despain, Jim Flowers, Bethany Smith, Drinda Cherukuri, Debbie Andrews, April Bartley, Patricia Marshall, Cheryl Caddell, Bill DeLuca
Thank you to all for your hard work!!!!!!
IHE Report
-look at last year’s IHE Report
-may look at reports online
-there is an undergraduate report (the biggie), MSA report, and graduate report
-faculty, after looking at past reports, should give Debbie numbers for this year
-the IHE especially wants to know about impact- activities and its impact and numbers of students involved in the activities
-anything having to do with global initiatives would help
-***Debbie to resend her memo about the IHE report
-the time frame is summer 2006 through the present
Next Few Weeks
-Final interviews for Debbie’s position
-written reports from NCDPI and NCATE will be available in the coming weeks
-SWAT team will be working on the rejoinder
-any meetings regarding the rejoinder will be conducted individually or by programs, but not as a general faculty
Reflection on the Accreditation Visit
-the purpose is to harvest questions asked by accreditation members as well as reflect on how to be better prepared for the next visit
- Concern about the consistency of data collection and that this data was transparent as well as useful
- NCATE probing for data consistency at the program level
- How do you know that students have mastered subject matter- looking for a mean score, but they did not want GPA, they did want Praxis II score, they were not impressed with lesson plans
- Identify content standards
- Verify content- created a chart comparing program students with other students and performance on signature artifacts, they would take a rubric score, but not GPA
- Problems with collecting mean score with small programs
- Regardless of data collected, they wanted a spreadsheet that would indicate patterns to show what you do with data
- They were interested in strengths and weaknesses of student teachers, but we don’t collect data in a manner that they wanted, like in a spreadsheet. Our data is in vignettes
- Asked for rubrics for dispositions
- NCATE members could not clarify what kind of data they needed
- Asked for how program decisions are made
- Systematically looking at programs and the way they are run, for example keeping minutes, implementing changes based on meetings
- Concerns over roles as program coordinators and the impact on teaching and scholarship. We are not having conversations about curriculum and student achievement
- How can we assure that students in online classes are exposed to students from diverse populations
Data Collection
-We need to determine what data we need, how we use it- it is up to us to convince board members of how we use our data
-We need to aggregate our data as a unit
-Programs need to all get on the same page, for example turn in rubrics if they are needed
-need programs to systematically keep track of decisions and changes, and then pass these reports up to the unit level- ***this needs to be done this year, especially to show NCATE when they come back for the next visit
-don’t want to have too much homogenization of programs simply for NCATE purposes- programs need to have some autonomy
-the university has a form that will help programs to reflect on their data and write reports tracking data
-***Dr. Ponder will find formats for reports and send these out to program coordinators with a due date for sending back these reports
Program Coordinators
-need to look at the implications of job of program coordinator and how this may impact job promotion- this may cause problems between faculty and problems due to time spent on scholarship
-***another meeting needs to be called to address issues related to program coordinator position
-***instead of another meeting, Dr. Ponder will take this on and go to Dean Moore to handle this issue
-one way to deal with this would be to find money for release time, however there are resource issues that need to be addressed
-do not want to do more task-forcing on this issue- do not want to spend another 2 years talking about this issue
-could consider the SME and include the role of the program coordinator in the promotion process
-the statement of expectations needs to take another look at service as it relates to the program coordinator position
-the administration needs to accept the change to SME
-many faculty are voicing comments that they will not be around for the next accreditation visit due to the overwhelming work of accreditation- this may be a way to show administration the concern and the need for action on this issue
-would be nice to show the money equivalent in faculty time spent on accreditation
Additional Comments
-we are in the midst of a major culture change and the current dialogue is encouraging and needs to continue
-the hope is the new assessment system may help with the running of reports and keeping track of data
-should we revisit the necessity to be a part of NCATE?- need to ask what NCATE does for us- currently the State Board of Education requires NCATE accreditation- our options are restricted by being a state institution, but the conversation will continue on
-may help if this institution along with other institutions start the process for shopping for other accrediting bodies that will meet our needs