Standard 5: Unit Governance and Resources
Qualified Faculty
Wittenberg University’s professional education faculty have earned doctorates or exceptional expertise related to their assignments. Their qualifications, along with those of the clinical and adjunct faculty,are presented in EXHIBIT: S5_1_FacultyQual. Clinical faculty are primarily used as university supervisors during the clinical practice experience. Professional education faculty sometimes serve as clinical practice university supervisors but always supervise pre-clinical practice field experiences. All clinical faculty members have had professional experiences in school settings at the levels that they supervise. Adjunct faculty serve as course instructors, supervise field experiences, and also supervise clinical practice, but they are not expected to advise or engage in scholarly activities. Both professional education faculty and adjunct faculty teach in the initial and advanced programs. In 2014-2015, the unit had seven professional education faculty members; all hold doctorates, four are tenured and three untenured. The unit is also served by a full-time Director of Student Teaching who holds a master’s degree and over 30 years of teaching and building leadership work in P-12 schools.
Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching
The unit’s emphasis on teaching coincides with the mission of Wittenberg and the unit’s program outcomes. Specifically, the unit’s conceptual framework provides a series of commitments towards intellectual inquiry, care, diversity, leadership, service, technological competence, change, and professional growth. Each course taught in the initial program is aligned with relevant unit program outcomes (based on the unit’s conceptual framework), the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession, and specialized professional association standards. Likewise, each course in the advanced program is aligned with relevant graduate program outcomes and these outcomes serve as the guidance for faculty to model best practices in teaching. These alignments support selection of course resources and candidate assessment tied directly to current developments in the specific field of teaching and to the unit’s conceptual framework. At the end of each course,candidates are determined to be either successful or unsuccessfuland assigned a program outcome rating. As a way to value candidate learning and to adjust instruction, candidates’ program outcome ratings are reviewed and discussed by the entire professional education faculty prior to the start of each semester.Candidate performance data is regularly shared with the professional education faculty,providing them opportunities to assess their own effectiveness as teachers.
All initial program courses are taught by professional education or adjunct faculty. Fewer than 20% of undergraduate courses are taught by adjunct faculty members. No graduate students are used to teach initial program courses. Professional education faculty model a variety of high leverage practices in both the initial and advanced program as outlined in Exhibit: S5_2_HighLeveragePractices.
Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship
All professional education faculty members are expected to be scholars who are interested in and contributing to their disciplines, establishing and maintain a professional identity beyond the Wittenberg community. Exhibit: S5_3_FacultyManualScholarship articulates the scholarhip expectation for the unit’s professional education faculty.
EXHIBIT S5_4_Activity… contains examples of recent peer-reviewed, published articles or professional papers authored and co-authored by members of the unit’s professional education faculty. Over the past three years, nearly every member of the professional education faculty have contributed to the scholarly work related to their fields of specialization through peer reviewed articles or professional papers. Additionally, 100% of the unit’s professional education faculty have presented at conferences of various professional organizations. Also, two professional education faculty members received national and university awards in 2014-15 for their scholarship.
Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service
All professional education faculty are actively engaged in service to the unit, the university, and to the broader community. A summary of service and collaborative activities of the professional education faculty is displayed in EXHIBIT S5_5_SummaryFacultyService. These data indicate a high level of commitment and collaboration in both P-12 schools and in the broader professional education community. All tenured and tenure track faculty at Wittenberg University are expected to engage in service as detailed inExhibit: S5_6_FacultyManualService. Because of the relatively small number of professional education faculty and the work required within the unit, every member serves on more than one ofthe unit’s standing committees. Charges, current rosters, and frequency of meetings are listed in EXHIBIT S5_7_UnitCommitteeStructure.The unit also convenes three student groups, the Wittenberg University Student Education Association (WUSEA) and the Kappa Delta Pi Education Honorary, and the Student Advisory Committee. A professional education faculty member also serves as the advisor for these three organizations. Currently three different professional education faculty members serve as advisors of these organizations in order to meet with the organzations’ executive boards and oversee their activities.
Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance
All members of the education department faculty (i.e., professional education and adjunct) are evaluated in accordance with the policies set forth in the Wittenberg Faculty Manual (see EXHIBIT S5_8_TenureProcess). In both the initial and advanced levels, candidate evaluations of instructors are completed at the end of each course taught. At the initial level, candidates complete an electronic version of the IDEA form as well as a more informal assessment tool comprised of open-ended questions related to the instructor and the course. In the advanced program, candidates complete a department-designed rating sheet that is submitted to the chair of the graduate program for review and program documentation. In addition to the candidate evaluations, the chair observes and evaluates department faculty on a routine basis and as needed for tenure and promotion cases. During the probationary period, all tenure-track members collaboratively analyze an annual review with the department chairperson. These reviews include evidence from the IDEA teaching evaluation as well as progress in the scholarship and service domains as well. This process allows formative feedback to the faculty member within the context of expectations for promotion and tenure at the university. An example of an annual review is found in EXHIBIT S5_9_AnnualReview.
Tables 1 and 2 in EXHIBIT S5_10_IDEARatingsummarize the IDEA ratings from the undergraduate courses for the 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-14 academic years. For the purpose of this report, only the average ratings for Excellent Teacher and Excellent Course are being reported, and the ratings of the Education Department are compared with those of the institution. As seen in Table 1 reporting Excellence of Teacher, the ratings for the professional education faculty are comparable to those of the institution. Table 2 shows the department’s Excellence of Course student ratings to be comparable to those of the institution. These ratings, between 4 and 5 on a 5-point rating scale, would indicate a high degree of student satisfaction with the teachers and the courses in the Education Department.
Student responses for the advanced program are reported in the table on the Ratings from the Grad Program Evaluations EXHIBIT S5_11_RatingGrad. Due to the fact that the instructors in the advanced program are not evaluated using the IDEA forms, the Graduate Program Committee created and implemented its own teacher evaluation form.
Unit Facilitation of Professional Development
The unit recognizes the need for the professional education faculty to be continuous learners and supports them in their pursuit of professional development opportunities. Based on the annual review process and individually developed professional goals, all professional education faculty are provided encouragement and support for developing scholarly work around teaching, inquiry, and service. The university, through the Faculty Development Board (FDB), offers grants for participation at conferences, research, course development and revision, and travel expenses. Several members of the Education Department have taken advantage of this financial support (EXHIBIT S5_12_ProfDev). The FDB also offers professional development sessions throughout the year that are available to university faculty, and members of the Education Department have taken advantage of these opportunities. The unit has supported the professional development of its faculty by sponsoring workshops related to the use of technology (e.g., SmartBoard, Moodle, TaskStream, sudent response systems) and candidate assessment (i.e., edTPA see EXHIBITS S5_13_IntroedTPA, S3_13_SupportFacMtg, S5_14_StudRespSys). These types of workshops keep faculty current with methods that can be incorporated into their instruction and classroom organization/management. Starting in the 2012-2013 academic year, the unit professional development program offered faculty the opportunity to present colloquia that would be open to the university and education candidates (see EXHIBIT S5_15_Colloquia). These workshops and colloquia have also been open to adjunct faculty. Adjuncts have also been provided with a manual summarizing the policies and procedures essential to the operation of the unit. The adjunct manual, a sample shown in EXHIBIT S5_16_AdjHndbk, serves as the primary source of orientation for adjunct faculty members. These practices have been implemented to increase the likelihood that the content and quality of courses remains more consistent across instructors.
MOVING TOWARDS TARGET
The Education Department has identified this indicator in standard 5 as an area in which it is moving
toward target.
Members of the Education Department have many opportunities offered by the institution that support
their continuing professional development. The university's Faculty Development Board (FDB) provides
grants in support of faculty research and dissemination of research. The FDB also offers professional
development workshops throughout the year to the members of the university faculty. A number of
members of the Education Department have taken advantage of the financial support and professional
development opportunities offered by the FDB. Austin, Linder, Post, Whitlock, and Yontz have received
Professional Enrichment Grants ($700 each) in 2012-2013; Linder Whitlock, and Yontz in 2013-2014,
and Linder McGuffey, and Post in 2014-2015. Post and Linder received Faculty Research Award at
$1500 each (2011-2013); Austin (2012-2013); Yontz (2014-2015. New Course Grant award of $1000
were awarded to Linder (2011-2012) and Brannan (2014-2015). Yontz also received a Witt Tech Grant
totaling approximately $1100 in 2011-2012.
Faculty members are also eligible to receive $600 per year toward traveling expenses for attendance at
conferences, available from individual departments. This money can accumulate for two years to the
total of $1200, but it must be used by the end of the second year. This financial resource has also been
utilized by members of the Education Department to fund attendance at conferences.
. Linder: 2012-2013, funding for trip to International Reading Association conference
. Post: 2012-2013: funding for trip to Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators conference
. Yontz 2013-2014: funding for trip to Clute Institute Academic Conference
. Post: 2013-2014: funding for trip to Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators conference
. Yontz 2013-2014: funding for trip to Association of Teacher Educators conference.
. Broidy 2014-2015: funding for trip to Critical Issues in Education conference.
. McGuffey 2014-2015: funding for trip to National Association of Secondary School Principals
conference
. Post 2014-2015: funding for trip to National Council for Teachers of Mathematics conference
. Yontz 2014-2015: funding for trip to American Association of Independent Colleges of Teacher
Eduction conference.
In addition to the opportunities provided by the university, the department has offered workshops to fulltime
and adjunct faculty in order to keep them current in the use of the SmartBoards, Moodle, and the
edTPA process. Prior to student teaching each spring, the Director of Student Teaching and Field
Placement and the Academic Department Assistant provide an extensive orientation for the unit's
Clinical Faculty and the University Supervisors. Exhibit S3_14_SupportFacMtg provides a recent
example of the presentation. Clinical Faculty and student teachers receive annual training and on-going
guidance throughout the edTPA process from professional education faculty who have received edTPA
training. Exhibit S5_13_IntroedTPA outlines resources used for this training and support.
The department's Faculty Development Committee has been instrumental in initiating and organizing the
professional development offerings for the department. Beginning in the 2012-2013 academic year,
members of the faculty were asked to present colloquia in their areas of research/interest as part of the
department's professional development offerings for students and other interested individuals. Not only
does this practice allow faculty members to learn from each other, it provides the presenters with the
opportunity to clarify, organize, and articulate their research. The following faculty members presented
on these topics since fall 2012.
. Barb Austin, fall 2012: Does Effective Science Teaching Involve Reading?
. Steve Broidy, fall 2012: Kindness as a Teaching Ethic
. Roberta Linder and Tracy Whitlock, fall 2013: Using Mentor Texts and 6 Traits Framework for
Narrative Writing in Grades K-8
. Brian Yontz, spring 2015: Applying place theory from John Dewey to teacher education at Wittenberg
University.
Under the direction of the Faculty Development Committee, professional development opportunities will
continue to be offered to members of the faculty.
Members of the Education Department faculty also contribute to their continuing professional learning
by serving on committees for Senior Honors projects and master's thesis projects. The list below
summarizes recent faculty involvement with Senior Honors projects and master's theses.
2011-2012
Senior Honors Thesis Committees
. L. Hanners: Brian Yontz and Sally Brannan
. D. Caciano: Brian Yontz and Roberta Linder
Master's Thesis Committees
. M. Clark: Roberta Linder, Brian Yontz
2012-2013
Senior Honors Thesis Committee
. E. Cooke: Roberta Linder, Tracy Whitlock, LowellMonke
Master's Thesis Committees
. M. Troxtell: Roberta Linder, Tracy Whitlock, Sally Brannan
. K. Chadeayne and Hannah Scherger: Brian Yontz, Gina Post, LowellMonke
2013-2014
Master's Thesis Committees
. E. Westerman: Roberta Linder, Phil Fraley, BrianYontz
. T. Abraham and R. Wheeler: Phil Fraley, Sally Brannan, Roberta Linder
. S. Anderson-Cook: Gina Post, Phil Fraley
. J.Dewey: Brian Yontz, Gina Post
. E. Banion: Phil Fraley, Gina Post, BrianYontz
. K. Cammarn: Phil Fraley, Gina Post, Roberta Linder
. D. McCoy: Gina Post, Roberta Linder
2013-2014
Senior Honors Thesis Committee
. A. Owens: Sally Brannan, Tracy Whitlock
. T. Weisheit: Tracy Whitlock, Sally Brannan
Master's Thesis Committees
. K. Andorfer: Gina Post, Sally Brannan
. B. Garner: , Gina Post, Amy McGuffey
. A. Liefeld: Roberta Linder, Brian Yontz
. S. Lonsinger: Roberta Linder, Amy McGuffey
. L. Ratliff: Roberta Linder, Sally Brannan
. H. Washburn: Roberta Linder, Brian Yontz
. J. Washburn: Roberta Linder, Brian Yontz
At any one time, faculty members are serving as chairs or members on multiple committees for
undergraduates and graduates.
Individual faculty members have also attended training / workshops in order to become or remain
reviewers and to participate in edTPA scoring.
. Yontz_summer 2013_reviewer for NCATE/CAEP BOE training
. Post_January 2013_refresher training for NCTM/NCATE reviewers
. Brannan, Linder, and Whitlock_March 2013_training for edTPA local scoring
Dr. Post also attended the Choose Ohio First conference in May 2013 and the National Noyce
Conference in June 2014 as one of the faculty members involved with these grants.
Beginning in fall 2011, department mentors were assigned to the three new hires. In addition, a unit
faculty manual was compiled and distributed to all members of the faculty. With subsequent hires of
adjunct faculty, the department chair paired them with full-time faculty member as mentors, and they
were also given an abbreviated version of the faculty manual that contained information pertinent to
adjuncts. All new hires since 2011 have received a veteran colleague to serve as a mentor.
The faculty's commitment to professional development has impacted candidate performance and
program quality. First, by offering a larger number of colloquia and presentations in the department,
candidates have been afforded the opportunity to stay current with the latest trends in education and to
see the members of the faculty as experts in the areas in which they teach. In addition, the Research
Forum that is offered each semester provides a public forum for candidates in both the initial and
advanced programs to present their completed research. By requiring the initial program candidates to
attend one professional development session per semester, the department is communicating the
importance of continual learning. Second, the workshops and adjunct faculty manuals, with an example
inExhibit S5_17_ AdjHndbk, have assisted in bringing continuity to the instruction and supervision
expectations of the unit. This consistency is crucial in maintaining program quality while at the same
time utilizing non-tenure track instructors. Third, along the same line, the orientation provided to the
Clinical Faculty and University Supervisors has been beneficial in communicating the unit's standards
for the clinical experience. Through this process, the Clinical Faculty, University Supervisors, and
candidates have all received the identical information regarding the clinical experience, and this provides
the foundation for positive candidate performance in the clinical experience. Fourth, with faculty having
been trained as reviewers and scorers, they bring a reviewer's perspective to work and discussions
involving various aspects of the program. Their intimate knowledge of NCTM, NCATE/CAEP, and the
edTPA enable the unit to strengthen its curriculum and to better prepare candidates for performance on
licensure exams and the edTPA. Finally, the members of the faculty value attending and presenting at a
large number of professional organizations. Their on-going participation in these activities indicates their
commitment to remaining current and contributing to the scholarship in their fields. This ensures that the
content of their classes is relevant and that they are preparing candidates based on current knowledge