Year-1 ILP Review Panel Reporting Guide

Year-1 ILP Review Panel Report

Faculty Candidate’s Name: Christina Hardin

Dean’s Name: Kevin Mulholland

Review Date: April 24 Date Report Sent to Candidate: April 29

Assessments based on the criteria and standards outlined in
Valencia Portfolio Evaluation Rubric

I. Clear Goals

A. Candidate’s Workload Context Discussed?Yes

Panel’s Comments: Everything was clearly described

B. Candidate’s Philosophy Discussed? Yes

Is the philosophy

• Clearly stated?
• Supportive of teaching & learning?
• Evident in the Learning Outcomes?

What are the strengths of the Philosophy?

There was a good sense of personal mission & purpose.

What specific recommendations do you have to help the candidate improve the philosophy statement?

NA

C. Learning Outcome Statement #1 Discussed?Yes

What the faculty candidate wants to learn, achieve, or accomplish.

What the faculty candidate has done to learn, achieve, or accomplish the LO (workshops, books,articles, conversations, etc.).

Is the Learning Outcome

• Clearly stated?
• Related to teaching and learning?
• Assessable?

What are the strengths of the LO Statement?

This involves collaboration with another faculty member (who is also tenure-track). It also addresses a real need as students clearly lack research skills and they are not acquiring them through osmosis.

What specific recommendations do you have to help the candidate phrase the LO Statement more effectively?

It’s important to get some more clarity about what this LO will achieve. The processes/products, for example, do not match what was promised in the learning outcome section (a learning guide). Is this going to have a tight focus on the impact of better research instruction from the library, or is it going to include follow-up work in the classroom? Also, it needs to be restated as being applicable to ENC 1101, not ENC 1102.

What specific recommendations do you have for the candidates to improve embedded Essential Competencies, Conditions that Provide Focus, and/or Products/Evidence of Learning?

While the projected assignment relates to LifeMap, it needs to be part of a more conscious and deliberative attempt to help students formulate educational and professional goals. Once the assignment is done, how will it be used?

It may be more appropriate to use LO#3 to demonstrate the scholarship of teaching and learning via an ARP. See comments below.

It wasn’t entirely clear how this is going to demonstrate mastery of assessment. Some kind of rubric is needed that can assess enhanced research abilities AND Lifemap skills.

This comment is really applicable to ALL the LO’s. It’s better to be very precise about how each LO will develop each competency rather than to use boiler-plate language.

D. Learning Outcome Statement #2 Discussed? Yes

What the faculty candidate wants to learn, achieve, or accomplish.

What the faculty candidate has done to learn, achieve, or accomplish the LO (workshops, books,articles, conversations, etc.).

Is the Learning Outcome

• Clearly stated?
• Related to teaching and learning?
• Assessable?

What are the strengths of the LO Statement?

It is perfectly appropriate to have a LO which really focuses on improving your skill-set.

What specific recommendations do you have to help the candidate phrase the LO Statement more effectively?

Be more precise. This is really about what YOU will learn, not your students. Also, give us more details about how you will learn what you want to learn. In the absence of a travel budget, tell us more about the literature you’ll read, the classes you’ll visit, etc.

What specific recommendations do you have for the candidates to improve embedded Essential Competencies, Conditions that Provide Focus, and/or Products/Evidence of Learning?

Commit to a product – perhaps a defined number of new teaching techniques that you will try in the coming year. You can attach evidence of student learning to tell us if they were effective or not. That will help demonstrate how you became more learning centered. This could also be another place (or an alternative place) to demonstrate professional commitment.

E. Learning Outcome Statement #3 Discussed? Yes

What the faculty candidate wants to learn, achieve, or accomplish.

What the faculty candidate has done to learn, achieve, or accomplish the LO (workshops, books,articles, conversations, etc.).

Is the Learning Outcome

• Clearly stated?
• Related to teaching and learning?
• Assessable?

What are the strengths of the LO Statement?

Trying to improve group work is one of the best things you can do. This LO affords the opportunity of refining a teaching and learning tool that will be usedfor many years to come.

What specific recommendations do you have to help the candidate phrase the LO Statement more effectively?

This could be a really effective ARP. In any case, consider re-phrasing this around some central questions. Start by asking what the 3 biggest problems are in designing group assignments. How can you address these? What will you do? What will be the impact of the changes and how will that impact be measured?

What specific recommendations do you have for the candidates to improve embedded Essential Competencies, Conditions that Provide Focus, and/or Products/Evidence of Learning?

This could be a good place to demonstrate the scholarship of teaching & learning if this became an ARP. Be more explicit how this will serve inclusion & diversity as well as the core competencies.

F. Professional Development Efforts/Plans Described? Yes

Professional development efforts and plans are

• Relevant
• Clearly described
• Adequate to achieve the LOs

Panel’s Comments:

You are diligently attending TLA classes, working closely with colleagues, and doing everything else you should be doing.

II. Effective Presentation of Clear Goals Section

What are the presentation strengths of the Goals Section?

What specific recommendations do you have to help the candidate improve the presentation of the Goals Section?

III. Understanding of the Essential Competencies

Exemplary:Candidate has gained comprehension-level understanding of the Essential Competency and can relate this understanding to his or her classroom/professional practice.

Acceptable: Candidate has gained comprehension-level understanding of the Essential Competency.

Not Yet Acceptable:

Candidate has not yet gained comprehension-level understanding of the Essential Competency.

A. Candidate’s Understanding of Learning-centered Teaching & Learning Strategies

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

All 3 LO’s are really focused on this competency.

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

A little more depth of understanding could have been revealed.

B. Candidate’s Understanding of Valencia’s Core Competencies for Students (TVCA)

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

There is an obvious and laudatory commitment to teaching all the competencies.

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

It’s important to be a little more deliberative in deciding which assignment really developes each competency. They were all somewhat lumped together.

C. Candidate’s Understanding of Assessment

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

There was a little confusion as to what constitutes formative and summative assessment.

D. Candidate’s Understanding of Inclusion and Diversity

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

There was an explicit recognition of the importance of different learning styles.

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

Other aspects of inclusion and diversity deserve some mention.

E. Candidate’s Understanding of LifeMap

Not Yet Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

LifeMap is included on one LO and there was some general discussion about its importance.

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

LifeMap really deserves more attention. At the moment, it is somewhat consigned to a box that can be ticked off when some kind of work-related assignment is complete.

F. Candidate’s Understanding of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

A good grasp of the basic concept was shown.

If not rated exemplary, in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

The discussion of research practices was a little superficial when we discussed the ARP.

Note: Keep in mind, all SofTL indicators need to be demonstrated to satisfy this competency in the final documentation. Complete Action Research projects, by nature, satisfy all of the SofTL indicators.

G. Candidate’s Understanding of Professional Commitment

Acceptable

Panel’s Comments on strengths:

The candidate’s work record demonstrates a real commitment to professional commitment.

If not rated exemplary,in what aspect/area of this Essential Competency does the candidate need to deepen his/her understanding?

The discussion of this competency was a little off-hand.

Year 1 Portfolio Review Panel Report