Milwaukee Council on Professional - UW-Milwaukee

Document Sample
Milwaukee Council on Professional - UW-Milwaukee Powered By Docstoc
					University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee
Council on Professional Education
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Enderis 597
1:00-3:00 pm

Present: Katerina Belazelkoska, Assessment GA; Kathy Berry, Coordinator of
Professional Education Programs; Wanda J. Blanchett, Associate Dean, School of
Education; Rita Delzer, Academic and Student Information Specialist; Audrey
Dentith, Education Administration; Anne Ellison, School Psychology; Scott Emmons,
Music Education; Nancy File, EC Education; Alison Ford, Assessment and Program
Review Coordinator; Randy Goree, EA-A Social Studies; Dj Himes, Technical and
Training Coordinator; Kerry Korinek, Communications Manager for Assessment;
Hope Longwell-Grice, MCEA Education; Linda Post, Chair, Curriculum &
Instruction, TNE; Marleen Pugach, MCEA Education, TNE; Chuck Schuster,
Associate Dean, Letters & Science; Raji Swaminathan, Alternative Education; Wendy
Volz Daniels, School Social Work; Tom Walker, Associate Dean, School of
Information Studies; Bonnie Withers, Library Media

1. Welcome and transitions (Wanda)

Alison Ford will now serve as Coordinator of Assessment and Program Review.

2. Orienting to agenda & contents of folder

As the steering committee for professional education programs, the CPE will have 3
regular meetings per year to share info, seek feedback, and establish consensus (and
register objection). The remaining 06-07 dates are: February 7, 1:00-3:00; May 3,
9:00-1:30 (mini-retreat).

Additionally, program coordinators will be asked to meet 3-4 times to establish
agreement on unit measures.

3. Core Guiding Principle & Standards (document sent with agenda)

       a. Final approval date for copy
       b. Similar format for WI standards for administration and pupil services
       c. Advanced licensure programs ...ok to use national program standards as
       first-level organizer as long as clearly linked to state standards (and students
       are aware of this linkage). A "Standards Overview Chart" will be distributed to
       clarify which standards are used for each program

Support for the Core Guiding Principle and the TE Standards document has been
established at several meetings. Some revisions are still requested regarding the
complexity of some of the language, the addition of gender as an urban issue, more
mention of technology, and a name for the standards. Any recommendations should
be sent to Marleen Pugach, who will meet with Alison Ford and Raji Swaminathan
next week to do final revisions by Friday, September 29.

The Council expressed support for the document, with the above editions.

Parallel documents that infuse the Core Guiding Principle of Urban Education/Equity
into the 7 Administrator and 7 Pupil Services standards should be developed. CPE
writing teams will be created to draft documents in each of these areas.

One major item to address in the DPI Remediation Plan is having a more consistent or
common framework for standards and assessments. Based on communication with
Laurie Derse, DPI, the common set of UWM-WI teaching standards will help with
consistency in the initial licensure program. She indicated that it is ok for the
advanced licensure programs to use their national standards as a first organizer as long
as the Wisconsin standards are clearly linked and students see this relationship.

All programs will use the Core Guiding Principle. The teacher education programs
will use 10 UWM-WI Teaching Standards as a first-level organizer. To be consistent,
it is preferred that the Advanced licensure programs use the national standards as a
first level organizer, and then link to the UWM-WI Administrator Standards or the
UWM-WI Pupil Services Standards. Alison and Kerry will follow up with the
Advanced Programs on this.

4. E-portfolio demonstration

       a. Reporting out -- Phase I programs
       There are 3 Phase I pilot programs: School Psychology, Music Education, and
       MCEA Exceptional Education. The incoming cohort of students for these
       programs will start using the portfolio.
       LiveText was chosen as the e-portfolio vendor late last spring, after CPE
       members looked at 3 vendors.
       Ann, Scott and Alison shared some information about the portfolio
       development done this summer for the Fall pilots. A portfolio template has
       been created that includes sections for: introduction, resume, philosophy
       statement, each program standard, field evaluations, and a professional
       development plan (PDP). Programs can make some changes to the template.
       Portfolios will include some unit assessments, for which rubrics will be written
       with oversight of the CPE, and programs have the flexibility of deciding on
       additional artifacts and assessments. The unit-level assessments will allow us
       to aggregate data on candidate performance across all programs or subsets
       (e.g, teacher ed; administrator; pupil services). An example unit assessment is
       measuring dispositional growth related to the Core Guiding Principle of Urban
       Education/Equity. The proposal is to measure this using a rubric for the
       philosophy statement upon Program Entry and Exit.
       The portfolios will allow for multiple and timely evaluation of student work
       and increased communication among instructors, students, and supervisors.
       Students will also have portable and easily accessible work.

       b. Implementation timeline

       A 3-year implementation timeline has been developed. Phase I pilots will
       begin this fall, Phase II programs will begin training for the portfolio in Spring
       2007 and begin use in Fall 2007, and Phase III programs will train in Spring
       2008 and begin use in Fall 2008. Programs that want to can begin sooner and
       take part in Phase II. Phase II should include one of the larger programs such
       as MCEA or EC in order to test the system infrastructure with a big group of
       students. Once the draft is completed recommending which programs to
       include in Phase II and III, the chairs/program coordinators will have a chance
       to react and move to a different phase if desired. There was some concern
       expressed over the length of the implementation timeline, but there had been a
       faculty vote to slow the process and the additional time and the presence of
       resources is needed to ensure successful implementation.

       c. Fee structure and outreach office

       Students will pay $132 for a subscription to LiveText. Of this, $81.75 covers
       the cost of subscription while the remaining charge will help pay for
       infrastructure such as training and additional computer lab equipment. The
       subscription covers the years in the program and one year after leaving the
       university (graduation/program completion/master’s degree completion). The
       fee will be attached to a workshop in which students will receive training and
       their subscriptions. This will be administered through the School of Education
       Outreach Office like the Act 31 workshop. An online workshop is also
       needed (e.g., Library Media programs have many distance ed students).
       Wanda indicated that Financial Aid can be used to cover the cost. The
       workshop and fee should be published in program sheets and included in
       admissions letters (March, for Fall 2007 admissions). Faculty must also be
       informed of the cost and what is included. Students can renew their
       subscriptions after they expire.

       Renewal can aid in the PDP process after completion. Outreach works on PDP
       support and will communicate this service.

5. Unit Assessment Charts

       a. Program Assessment Chart (document sent with agenda)
       b. Candidate Assessment Chart (document sent with agenda)
       c. Fall semester timeline to firm up Unit measures

       A major Fall task is to firm up some of the unit assessments. Upon
       considering the two charts (Program Assessment and Candidate Assessment),
       and the Remediation Plan –Alison presented 10 common assessment areas that
       need to be addressed:

   1. Quality of Clinical Sites
   2. Demographics (Entry & Completion)
   3. Communication
   4. Technology
   5. Urban/Equity Commitment: Philosophy Statement (& Interview) Rubric
   6&7. Clinical Experience Supervisor Evals (Early and Final Experiences) TE
   & Adv.
   8&9. Exit Portfolio – Standards Rubric Assessment TE & Adv.
   10. Exit and Follow-up Surveys

       Various tools have already been developed in programs to address these areas.
       The plan is to hold a work session in each area and encourage all interested
       faculty/staff to attend. Special efforts will be made to contact our colleagues
       who have already made an investment in a tool and have expertise in a
       particular area. The common assessment tool emerging from the work session
       will be reviewed by the CPE Assessment Workgroup and the Program
       Coordinators for further input/concensus.

6. Organization/Resources

       a. Organization Chart

       Alison Ford shared the organization chart for the schools/colleges, programs,
       CPE, workgroups, and several individuals. It was suggested that resources
       should also be charted. The need for program heads to be involved in the
       workgroups was expressed.
7. Next Meetings Scheduled. February 7, 1:00-3:00; May 3 mini-retreat, 9:00-

Shared By: