University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee
Council on Professional Education
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
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,
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)
5. Urban/Equity Commitment: Philosophy Statement (& Interview) Rubric
6&7. Clinical Experience Supervisor Evals (Early and Final Experiences) TE
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.
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-