Department of Curriculum and Instruction Retreat 200809

1
Department of Curriculum and InstructionRetreat
2008-09
2
Agenda

• Morning
• Welcome and introductions
• Departmental news, updates, and goals
• Committee and office updates
• External review tiger team recommendations
• Working Lunch
• Graduate program meetings and scheduling
• We must exit by 130 pm
• Please help put the room back in order

3
Welcome New andReturning Faculty and Staff
4
Departmental News and Updates
5
Faculty Changes

• Mark Balschweid
• Kara Harris
• Sarah Mahurt
• Ron Tzur
• Terry Wood

6
Searches

• Interim Dean Kelly has authorized CI to search
  for a faculty member, at the assistant or
  associate level, in mathematics education.
• The search for the COE Dean is continuing with
  the expectation that candidates will be on campus
  this fall.

7
Banner Implementation

• myPurdue portal
• Student self-registration (with PIN)
• EDCI 590, 698, 699 special
• SSINFO and SIS phased out
• All courses in Blackboard Vista
• Instructors submit grades online
• Plus and minus grading implemented

8
Budget Issues

• RIOs will replace SIOs for faculty accounts. This
  will allow better tracking.
• Course funds will now be placed in the faculty
  members RIO.
• CI went substantially over budget, particularly
  for personnel costs, in each of the past two
  years. We must make changes and tighten our belts
  this year. Please help to hold down costs.

9
Accountability

• North Central
• The Graduate Committee will be working to develop
  some standard assessments.
• NCATE
• Advanced programs must decide now whether to get
  prepared or eliminate the program.
• SPAs
• Details to follow.

10
SPA and State Program Reviews

• Ready or not here they come

11
Overview

• Individual program reports are a new requirement
  in Indiana.
• In advance of NCATEs unit accreditation visit in
  spring 2011, each licensure program must submit
  either a state report (if the area is not
  addressed by a national organizations standards)
  or a SPA report.

12
When?

• State reports are due this spring in fields that
  do not have national organization standards.
  These are agriculture education, consumer and
  family science education, and art education.
• SPA reports will be due on February 1, 2010, for
  the remaining licensure programs that are
  required to do them.

13
Who?

• Programs that must make SPA reports include
  elementary education (both undergraduate and
  TTT), computer education, English, mathematics,
  reading, science, social studies, technology, and
  world languages.
• These programs must respond to the standards of
  their respective professional organizations.

Separate reports are required unless all
assessments are identical
14
What?

• Each SPA report has certain required components
• Context
• Assessments (6-8 required)
• Standards Assessment Chart
• Evidence for Meeting Standards
• Use of Assessments for Program Improvement
• Revised Reports (only for revisions)

15
Context

• State and institutional overview
• Description of field and clinical experiences
• Criteria for admission, retention, and exit from
  program
• Relationship to units conceptual framework
• Relationship to unit assessment system and
  description of any unique assessments

COE will develop key elements of this section
for all programs
16
Context, contd.

• Three documents must be attached in relation to
  the context
• Required program of study with course titles
• Chart of number of candidates and completers for
  past three years
• Chart listing program faculty with their
  expertise and experience (not vitae, but will
  include key vitae information in condensed form)

17
Assessments

• Each program must include at least 6 key
  assessments. Up to 2 more may be included or in
  some cases required.
• Of the 6 assessments, 5 must address specific
  requirements. For some SPAs, the remaining 1 is a
  required elective while in other cases 1 or
  more additional assessments may be required to
  address specific SPA standards.

18
Standards Assessment Chart

• The chart must indicate how assessments are
  mapped to SPA standards.
• Each SPA standard must be linked to at least one
  assessment in most cases, standards will be
  addressed by more than one assessment.
• It is critical to document alignment between
  assessments, scoring guides, and SPA standards.

19
Five Required Assessments

• State licensure exam for content when used (e.g.,
  Praxis II)
• Assessment of content knowledge (e.g., course
  grades/GPA, comprehensive exam)
• Assessment of planning (e.g., lesson or unit
  plans)
• Student teaching/internship assessment
• Assessment of candidate impact on student learning

20
Assessment Components

• For each assessment, you must include
• The assessment instrument or a description of the
  assessment
• A scoring guide (e.g., grades or rubric) it is
  helpful if it is cross-referenced to standards
• Aggregated data from the past three years (or an
  explanation of the lack of data), which addresses
  whether candidates met standards

21
Use for Program Improvement

• Narrative organized according to content
  knowledge, pedagogical and professional
  knowledge, skills, and dispositions, and effect
  on student learning

22
Immediate Steps

• For programs that must complete a SPA or state
  review, it is essential that you now
• Develop a process for ensuring that the SPA
  report can be completed
• Identify the 6-8 assessments that will be
  reported
• Map those assessments to the SPA standards
• Begin assembling the data for the report

23
Questions?
24
Committee and Office Reports
25
Elementary Education Committee

• The Elementary Teacher Education Committee is
  responsible for curricula, requirements,
  policies, and procedures related to undergraduate
  and graduate elementary education programs.
• Areas of focus for 2008-09
• Prepare for Elementary Education SPA
  Accreditation Report for the Association for
  Childhood Education International (ACEI).
• On-going examination of program data to determine
  what needs to be done to make program
  improvements.

26
El Ed Committee Members

• J. Phillion, (Chair), Curriculum Studies, Block I
  (2011)
• L. Austin, OFE
• N. Boes, Block V
• L. Bohlin, Block II Educational Studies (2011)
• S. Britsch, (Chair-elect), Block IV, (2010)
• G. Carmody, TTT Coord.
• J. Dimitt, ADVR
• P. Ertmer, Ed Tech (2009)
• D. Gunstra, Block VI (Student teaching)
• C. Hopkins, LL and Block IV (2011)

• C. Johnson, Social Studies Block III (2011)
• T. J. Oakes, Asst Dean for Tchr Ed, Director of
  OPPL
• A. Roychoudhury, Science Block V (2011)
• R. Sabol, Art Ed
• A. Samarapungavan, Ed Studies (2009)
• A. Tyminski, Block V Math (2010)
• K. Dietz, Grad Office (ex-officio)
• R. Frisbie, Assessment (ex-officio)
• K. Reppert (ex-officio)

27
Faculty Affairs Committee

• Each member represents the CI faculty at large
  on issues related to teaching awards, merit
  review, faculty mentoring, etc. The committee
  makes recommendations for full faculty review and
  approval.
• 2008-09 members
• Lynn Nelson (chair), Brenda Capobianco, Chrystal
  Johnson, JoAnn Phillion, Jennifer Richardson

28
Faculty Affairs Committee

• Areas of focus for 2008-09
• Merit review procedures and consideration of
  revisions
• Helping the department to build a more collegial
  climate
• Suggestions for distinguished lecture speakers
• Other issues from the faculty?

29
Graduate Committee

• Graduate Committee  The Graduate Committee shall
  consist of elected representatives of each of the
  graduate program areas in the department who
  serve as the liaisons between their respective
  Program Areas on issues pertaining to the purview
  of the Graduate Committee and the Graduate
  School.  These representatives will convene the
  Program Areas when issues related to the Graduate
  Committee must be deliberated. 

30
Graduate Committee Members

• Members (2008-09)
• P. VanFossen, (Chair), Soc Stud (2009)
• J. Greenan, EWAC (2009)
• G. Krockover, (Chair-elect), Science (2011)
• J. May, LL (2009)
• J. Phillion, Curr Studies (2011)
• S. Schaffer, Ed Tech, (Chair), (2011)
• A. Tyminski, Math (2010)
• C. Fontaine, N. Central
• D. Aldridge, CI Admin. Asst. (ex officio)
• K. Dietz, Manager, Grad Studies (ex officio)
• C. Harris, Grad Student Org. (ex officio)

31
Graduate Committee Goals 2008-09

• Manage Tiger Team response ( proposal) to
  external review for EDCI graduate programs
• Advanced program review
• Decisions from program areas to keep/eliminate
  Masters
• Discuss common assessment rubrics (e.g., for
  Masters portfolios prelims etc.)
• Discuss student review forms (ala EdTech)
• Discuss Masters and PhD student recruitment
• Discuss/create guidelines for graduate awards
  (esp. Summer PRFs)

32
Primary Committee

• The Primary Committee, which consists of all
  tenured full and associate professors, is the
  body that makes determinations regarding
  promotion and tenure at the departmental level.
• This year, the Primary Committee will perform its
  usual review functions and will continue to
  provide mentoring for junior faculty members.

33
Office of Graduate Studies

• Staff Vicki Black, Kathy Dietz, Emily Hopkins
• Assist with Graduate Student Recruitment
• Develop recommendations for improved recruitment
• Meet with each area of specialization to learn
  about recruitment issues and create materials to
  distribute to prospective students
• Coordinate admissions for STEM Goes Rural/
  Woodrow Wilson Indiana Teaching Fellowships

34
Office of Graduate Studies

• Assist with documenting learning outcomes to meet
  Graduate School mandates for Higher Learning
  Commission accreditation
• Provide data as needed for various reports
• Assist students and faculty with the new Banner
  system
• Provide quality services to all students, faculty
  and staff

35
Office of Field Experiences

• Office Staff
• Linda R. Austin, Director
• Ed Wiercioch, Early Field Placement Coordinator
• Jim Gilligan, Student Teaching Placement
  Coordinator
• Information from the 2007-08 annual report
  follows.

36
Engagement 2007-2008

• Early Field Experiences
• 2,298 placements in 108 schools in 49 school
  corporations
• Urban Experience Ten Block I students spent Fall
  Break in Chicago Public Schools
• Student Teaching 517 placements in 208 schools in
  92 school corporations
• Engagement in Indiana counties
• 42 counties

37
Early Field Placements in Tuition Credit Voucher
School Corporations
38
Early Field Placements in Non-Tuition Credit
Voucher School Corporations
39
Student Teachers 2004-2009
40
Student Teaching Placements 2004-2009
41
Office of Advising and Recruiting

• Staff
• Jane Ann Dimitt, Director
• Lynette Flagge, Director of Diversity Initiatives
• Advisors Georgia Leavitt, Janet Robinson,
  Margaret Sutter, Sherre Meyer
• Assists current and prospective College of
  Education majors, advises students, provides
  personal and career counseling.

42
Office of Professional Preparation and Licensure

• Staff
• T. J. Oakes, Director and Assistant Dean
• Scott Bogan, Licensing Advisor
• Christine Hofmeyer, Licensing Advisor
• OPPL processes students' applications for all
  teacher education programs, provides information
  about programs available at Purdue, and monitors
  students' progress for retention within programs.

43

• Education IT Stuff
• Contact EdIT_at_purdue.edu
• New Person Alex Noguera!
• Make use of dept file servers for your COE data
• If moving computers ask us for help!
• Change your password every 120 days
• Office Hours Every Wed. 2-3 PM
• Coming New ITaP Survey System Qualtrics
• Updated anti-virus for notebooks contact us for
  appointment
• Project that involves technology? See our Grant
  Proposal Pre-Submission Technology Questionnaire

44

• New Tips and FAQ for Faculty/Instructors,
  University Supervisors, and Students
• http//www.education.purdue.edu/taskstream
• News
• Starting next semester students will have 500 MB!
• Gate C Courses
• Send EdIT your course roster, or request a
  courseself enrollment code
• Ensure that assignment and the assessment
  methodare accurate
• New Accounts
• Send email to EdIT requesting keycode to create
  account
• Enrollment Numbers
• Approx 2800 in 33 TaskStream Programs
• Training Sessions Available
• Christian is available for training sessions this
  Fall, please take advantage of it. Email EdIT for
  details.

45
http//www.education.purdue.edu
46
Associate Dean for Discovery and Faculty
Development

• Jeff Gilger
• http//www.education.purdue.edu/ODFD/
• Phone 4-6542 or 4-0019
• Email jgilger_at_purdue.edu
• Topics for today
• General announcements about research integrity
• Emergency procedures and syllabi

47
Research Integrity

• HIPPA regulations http//www.purdue.edu/policies/
  pages/records/vi_2_1.html
• Executive Memorandum C-22 http//www.purdue.edu/p
  olicies/pages/human_resources/c_22.html (note
  that this policy has been updated and seriously
  revised!!)
• Publish the COE-specific procedures for the
  handling of research integrity inquiries and
  misconduct
• Carry message to students in the COE see
  http//www.gradschool.purdue.edu/RCR/

48
Emergencies and Syllabi

• See Beering Hall emergency maps and guidelines
  at
• http//www.education.purdue.edu/ODFD/resources.ht
  ml. Browse other information there as well that
  will be available later.
• In particular see the syllabus addition at same
  site under title of General Syllabus Template.
  This addition must be inserted in to all syllabi
  starting Fall, 2008. If your Fall syllabus is
  already out or printed, simply hand out this
  portion to all students and be sure that they
  attend to it.
• It is the responsibility of the instructor to
  discuss emergency procedures with his/her class.

49
CI Goalsfor 2008-09
50
Overarching

• Prepare for SPA, NCATE, and NCA accreditation
  reviews.
• Develop communication plans to publicize and seek
  development support for key CI programs.
• Enhance graduate recruitment efforts across the
  department.

51
Discovery

• A continuing department goal is to publish an
  average of at least 2 refereed journal articles
  per faculty member each year. (Last year the
  average was 0.90, down from 1.25 the year
  before.)
• Another continuing goal is to achieve external
  funding of 125,000 or more per faculty member in
  the department. (Last year the average was
  58,000, down from 132,000 the year before.)

52
Learning

• Make substantive revisions to graduate programs
  to address issues raised in the external review
  of the department.
• Align all programs with accountability
  requirements for SPAs, NCATE, and NCA.
• Begin to develop ways to infuse elements of
  department/college signature themes in teacher
  education programs.

53
Engagement

• Continue to seek opportunities to engage with
  K-12 and other partners in ways that link to our
  discovery and learning missions.
• Fully document all engagement activities.
• In concert with university efforts, develop
  expectations/guidelines regarding the use of the
  scholarship of engagement toward promotion and
  tenure in the department.

54
Welcome from the Dean
55
Break

• Please be ready to resume in 10 minutes

56
External Review of the DepartmentRecommendations
of the Tiger Team
57
EDCI External Review Tiger Team Process

• Brenda Capobianco, Luciana De Oliveira, Nadine
  Dolby, Peg Ertmer, Jim Lehman, Phil VanFossen

58
First mtg. May 12

• Suggestions/options for next steps in response to
  external review of EDCI Graduate Programs
  (especially PhD programs)
• Issues generated by review Large number of
  programs, Research intensity, etc.
• What would tiger team produce?
• Task Benchmarking EDCI Ph.D.s at Big Ten
  institutions Michigan State, Indiana, Iowa,
  Minnesota, Penn State, Illinois
• Requirements/foundational courses/research
  experience requirements/faculty/joint
  appointments

59
Second mtg. May 19

• Reports of benchmarking focused on similarities
  across C I graduate programs and with EDCI
• Big Ten institutions Michigan State, Indiana,
  Iowa, Minnesota, Penn State, Illinois

60
Third mtg. June 2

• Completed reports of benchmarking
• Similarities many of our peers looked remarkably
  like us already
• Differences Key differences began to emerge

61
Fourth mtg. June 23

• Results of the benchmarking/comparison with
  external review recommendations
• Discussed recommendations for EDCI

62
RESULTS

• One key difference most peers had a relatively
  cohesive core for all students in C I
  doctoral programs
• Range MSU very prescriptive proseminar model
  ? IU C I major model

63
RESULTS

• This was a key theme in the external review
• The department should consider redesigning its
  existing set of programs into one core set of
  courses with 1-2 specializations
• Use the document to influence important
  conversations about the research skills and
  mentoring for all graduate students in the
  College . Present ways that CI can lead and
  share the research preparation of graduate
  students from across the College.

64
RESULTS

• Recommendation Institute a required core for
  all CI doctoral students.
• Rationale
• address important topics in a common way for
  students in the department (reducing the burden
  on faculty and programs to provide this
  information),
• create common experiences for students from
  various CI programs that will allow them to get
  to know one another and build esprit de corps
• help to strengthen the research climate in the
  department for both students and faculty.

65
RESULTS

• Second key difference most peers had much fewer
  degree options/divisions (especially at Masters
  level)
• UIUC 3 MSU 4 PSU 4
• The department should consider redesigning its
  existing set of programs into1-2
  specializationsthat allow faculty to work on
  complex educational issues that may leverage
  future grant funding.

66
RESULTS

• Recommendation Restructure graduate programs in
  the department into a small number of divisions.
• Rationale
• Creating a smaller number of divisions will
  improve operational efficiencies (e.g., reduce
  the number of representatives needed to serve on
  committees)
• create more opportunities for cross-disciplinary
  collaboration.

67
EDCI External Review Tiger Team Specific
Recommendations
68
Discussion 1

• Please get into groups according to the number on
  your name tag.
• ??????
• Refer to the recommendations on the sheets that
  are being circulated.

69
Discussion Question 1a

• Please discuss the following questionHow could
  having a common core of Ph.D. courses facilitate
  our graduate programs (i.e. what are the pros and
  cons of this idea)?

70
Discussion Question 1b

• Please discuss the following question What
  modifications or adjustments might you suggest so
  that the proposed core could better serve our
  students and the department?

71
Discussion 2

• Please reorganize into groups according to the
  symbol on your name tag.
• ????? ?
• Refer to the recommendations on the sheets that
  are being circulated.

72
Discussion Question 2a

• Please discuss the following question How
  could having a small number of divisions benefit
  our graduate programs (i.e. what are the pros and
  cons of this idea)?

73
Discussion Question 2b

• Please discuss the following question What are
  the pros and cons of the two suggested
  configurations? What other configurations might
  you suggest?

74
Next Steps

• The tiger team will take the feedback from
  todays retreat and use it to develop final
  recommendations to bring forward to the first CI
  faculty meeting on Friday, September 19.
• Thank you for your input!

75
Working Lunch Graduate Program Meetings

• Please work on spring schedules and planning for
  the upcoming year. You may leave whenever youve
  completed your work. We MUST be out by 130 p.m.

76
When your work is finished, we areAdjourned

• Thank you for helping to put the room back in
  order!