Preface: Team Members and Nature of the Visit
Between November 15 and 19, 1997, a joint NCATE-State team visited Eastern
Michigan University in Ypsilanti, MI, to conduct a continuing accreditation review of the education Unit. The NCATE team consisted of four NCATE Board of Examiner members and one representative from the Michigan Federation of teachers; the Michigan State team was comprised of four team members, and one consultant (observer) from the Michigan Department of Education. None of the Michigan team is NCATE trained, but all had been members of other joint NCATE/state visits.
This visit was an unusual BOE continuing accreditation visit because of its experimental nature. Electronic means were used to conduct some of the business of an accreditation visit, including some of the contacts outside Eastern Michigan University such as students in student teaching, university supervisors, and doctoral students. The 'document room' was completely electronic. Specifically, all of the documents of the typical document room were electronically available to the joint team prior to the accreditation visit; they were also available during the visit; and, they have been available after the visit. To be very clear about this matter, there was no document room for the team to use. All of the documents were on the College of Education's WWW (World Wide Web) site (http://www.education.emich.edu). The documents are still at this site should other education Units wish to examine how they were prepared for an 'electronic documents room'. [Documentation is now archived at http://www.emich.edu/NCATE1997 -EMU] The final report will also be dealt with electronically in that it will be sent to the Unit and to NCATE by electronic means; no paper will be used.
The Institution
Eastern Michigan University began in 1849 as the first normal school west of the Allegheny Mountains and the sixth normal school founded in the United States. In 1849, it was known as the Michigan State Normal School. The original purpose of the institution was to provide for 'the instruction of persons both male and female in the art of teaching, and in all the various branches that pertain to a good common school.' During the first 100 years of its existence, Michigan State Normal School certified thousands of teachers. It was also the site for several 'firsts' in education in the U.S.: 1) To offer teacher training courses in physical education; 2) to prepare teachers of disabled children; and, 3) to offer a program for the preparation of commUnity educators; 4) to offer a program in industrial arts; and, to establish a department of special education. And, although not part of the Unit's history, it was the place where the Michigan Education Association was organized.
Over time, the institution developed from Michigan State Normal School to Eastern Michigan State Normal College in 1899, to Eastern Michigan College in 1956, and finally to Eastern Michigan University (hereafter known as EMU) in 1969. Today, this multipurpose university is comprised of several colleges: College of Education (1959), College of Arts and Sciences (1960), Graduate School (1960), College of Business (1964), College of Health and Human Services (1973), and the College of Technology (1977). In this period of development, the institution has grown in physical size from 275 original acres to an additional 182 acres; and, it has expanded into the downtown of Ypsilanti in the construction of the College of Business, Gary M. Owen Building. In addition, courses and programs are offered beyond the EMU campus, as well as through the Internet and compressed video. Through this expansion and its multipurpose orientation, EMU offers bachelors and masters degrees; it has recently begun to offer its first doctorate, the doctor of education degree in educational leadership. EMU has held continuous accreditation from the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges since that accrediting organization was founded. In fact, several individuals from the institution were instrumental in founding of the NCA.
The service area of EMU is largely in the 14 county area of the southeastern corner of Michigan, including the cities of Ypsilanti, Detroit, Saginaw, and Pontiac, and Flint. It attracts a student body of approximately 25,000 students of which approximately 78% of the population are Caucasian, 15% are African American, five percent are Hispanic, and approximately one to two percent are of other minority groups. Women comprise approximately 60% of the student body. These demographics are representative of the geographic area of Michigan served by the institution. Further, many students work part-time; and, most students commute to campus.
The faculty of EMU is made up of 684 faculty, 90% of whom have a doctorate. The faculty is unionized and works with a contract between the University and the EMU chapter of the American Association of University Professors. The contract specifies both professional responsibilities and workload.
EMU is an autonomous university that is governed by a Board of Regents; this board is appointed by the governor of the State of Michigan and approved by the state Senate. The support of the university comes both from state tax revenues and from student tuition and fees.
The mission of the EMU is that of a 'comprehensive educational institution that prepares people and organizations to adapt readily to a changing world. Central to this mission are the following elements:
This mission is built upon a set of shared values that intend to develop an intellectual, ethical and aesthetic environment. The values are inherent in the following concepts that are enunciated in the catalogs of the institution: Excellence, Respect, Scholarship, OpportUnity, CommUnity, Service, Freedom, Integrity, Leadership, and Empowerment. These values are assessed through a set of guiding principles that are used to test the effectiveness of the value statements. Those concepts are as follows: Approachable (barriers to impede barriers are eliminated); Accessible (open to all qualified persons); Affordable (limitations, such financial resources, time restraints, or distance are reduced); Applicable (programs help develop informed, responsible citizens); Attainable (serve individuals with different needs); Collaborative (develop linkages with internal and external constituencies); and, Quality (the first priority).
From the beginning of its history, the institution has supported the preparation of teachers and educational personnel. It continues to do so through the following activities relating to memberships in appropriate organizations and accreditation.
1) EMU is a charter and continuous 50-year member of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. EMU's professional education programs have been accredited by NCATE since the founding of that organization. EMU is a member of the Teacher Education Council of State Colleges and Universities (TECSCU) and the dean of the College of Education is the president-elect of that organization. EMU is a member of the Michigan Association of Colleges for Teacher Education and the dean of the College of Education is the immediate past president of that group. The College of Education (COE) is a member of several other organizations, including the USA-SINO Teacher Education Consortium and the Michigan Council on Pre-Service Technology. Personnel are active in and provide leadership to the Michigan [Education] Deans' Council and the Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs (DARTEP). Personnel are active in the Association of Teacher Educators (ATE) and the office of the Michigan Association of Teacher Educators is housed in the EMU College of Education. EMU is the "university partner" (with the Detroit Public Schools and the Skillman Foundation) for the Comer Schools and Families Initiative in Detroit.
2) The university is an active member of The Renaissance Group and
the university's Provost has recently completed a term as an officer
of that organization. The "consociate school" model of the
Renaissance Group was first implemented at EMU. EMU strongly supports
the First Principle of the Renaissance Group--that professional
education must be an institution-wide function. Professional
education students select from majors and minors offered through
three of the university's five academic colleges and professional
education faculty are housed in the same three colleges.
The Unit
Although the Unit at EMU was formally designated 'College of Education' in 1959, its history suggests that the preparation of teachers has been an important contribution of the institution from its founding as a normal school to the present university structure which includes the Unit. Recognized in many ways for not only the size and diversity of its professional education programs, the Unit continues the programming for educational personnel that it has been pursuing for almost 150 years.
Within the Unit, there are approximately 3,500 undergraduate students and 2,000 graduate students in the four departments: Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance; Leadership and Counseling; special Education; and, Teacher Education. The make-up of the student body is approximately 80% females and 20% males. In respect to diversity of the current student-body, approximately 85% are White, 10% are Black, 2 % are Hispanic, and 3 % Asian, Native American, or Other.
The faculty has comprised a total of 116 (tenured or tenure track) for several years. For FY98, this number, plus part-time lecturers, plus spring and summer teaching, totals to 170.473 FTEF (Full Time Equivalent Faculty), a 0.4% increase from the previous fiscal year.. Of the tenure track faculty, 58% are female (42% male). Of the total faculty, 15% are faculty of color. This latter figure is up from 11.6% in 1992. Although there are some slight percentage differences between student and faculty diversity, both student and faculty diversity has a strong relationship to the demographics of the area served by the Institution.
About 3500 undergraduate students and about 2000 graduate and special students are involved in professional education programs during each academic year. There are about 2000 program completers each year, which makes EMU, according to each issue of the AACTE Directory, the nation's largest producer of educational personnel. Other statistics have shown that EMU is the nation's largest producer of special education personnel, the nation's largest producer of teachers of mathematics, and the nation's largest producer of teachers of science. EMU holds the largest collection of consumer and economic education materials in the nation. It was the first institution in Michigan (and still one of two institutions) to prepare teachers of Japanese language and culture. This institution is the state's second largest producer of minority teachers.
In both continuing and improving the programming for which the Unit has been known nationwide, some of the following accomplishments and initiatives include:
A. There has been a tenfold increase in sponsored project awards to COE faculty/staff over the past six years. This increase has permitted the faculty to address a number of unmet needs in the commUnity and with K-12 schools in ways never possible before, as well as to expand scholarly productivity. Development funds have increased dramatically in the past year.
B. Recent years have seen continued budget increases and faculty hirings. Twenty persons have joined the tenure-track faculty in the past two years.
C. In the past two years, technology improvements include the president's campus-wide faculty networking initiative, $250,000 in COE equipment acquisitions (primarily computer-related), $150,000 (for FY98) for multimedia classroom instruction improvements for the COE, a provost-funded new computer laboratory in the Library that primarily serves professional education students, and the donation of the equipment for the Bonisteel Computer Laboratory in Boone Hall..
D. There has been a completion of plans and funding for a "new" Education building that will be ready for occupancy in the spring of 1999, coinciding with the institution's sesquicentennial of service to professional education.
E. A complete reconfiguration of the initial and advanced programs for the development of educational personnel has taken place since 1993 with complete implementation due in 1998.
F. The recent NCATE BOE Continuing Education visit was accomplished through use of the Internet, WWW, compressed video, Email and other technological means. The traditional document room existed only in cyberspace. In other words, the traditional document room did not exist.
Because of its long tradition in the development of educational personnel, the Unit is known for the individuals it prepares and the awards that it has received. Below is a short listing of some of the most recent accomplishments of its programs and graduates:
1985--Exemplary Science Program, National Science Teachers Association
1985--Showcase for Excellence (Staff Development for School Improvement Program), American Association of State Colleges and Universities
1985--Showcase for Excellence (Pre-service Elementary Teacher Education Program in Science), American Association of State Colleges and Universities
1986--Exemplary Staff Development Program Which Serves as a Model for the Nation's Schools, American Association of School Administrators
1986--Distinguished Program in Teacher Education, Association of Teacher Educators
1987--Christa McAuliffe Showcase for Excellence (Commission on Creative Strategies to Solve the Educator Crisis), American Association of State Colleges and Universities
1987--Distinguished Achievement Award in Teacher Education, American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
1991--Silver Award, Council for Advancement and Support of Education
1991--Distinguished Program in Teacher Education (CITE), Association of Teacher Educators
1992--Christa McAuliffe Showcase for Excellence (The Use of Multicultural Literature to Develop Cultural Awareness and Reading and Writing Skills), American Association of State Colleges and Universities
EMU was cited for ten innovative teacher education programs in Those Who Can (American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1989).
Thomas Fleming, an alumnus, was the 1992 National Teacher of the Year. Alumni have been Michigan Teacher of the Year or first runner-up numerous times.
The 1991 New Jersey Teacher of the Year is an alumus.
The state Student Teacher of the Year award has been won frequently by an EMU student.
Several dozen alumni have become National Board Certified teachers.
Seventeen alumni have won the prestigious $25,000 prize from the Milken Family Foundation's National Educator Award program.
Last year, the state "teacher of the year," the state "elementary principal of the year," the state "secondary principal of the year," and the state "superintendent of the year" were all EMU alumni.
Unit alumni hold or have held numerous prominent positions in educational work. These include Don Cameron (Executive Director, National Education Association), Timothy Dyer (Executive Director, National Association of Secondary School Principals), William Morris (former president, American Association of School Administrators), Jim Wilsford (1989 AASA Superintendent of the Year), and several college and university presidents.
These examples demonstrate that the Unit is working systematically to carry out its mission of teaching, outreach, and extending the knowledge base on professional preparation. In the words of EMU President Shelton, 'It is the preparation of educational personnel for which EMU is widely known. Of course, we will continue to support and develop that for which we are known!'
CATEGORY 1: THE DESIGN OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
A. Observations
The Unit is organized around a theme at the initial level which "produces knowledgeable professionals who are caring, reflective, decision-makers in a culturally diverse and technological society" and which governs each of the Unit's programs. The Unit has continued to study, refine, and make more explicit the program model that was adopted after the 1993 NCATE visit. Advanced level programs in the Unit are organized around a theme that is intended to "develop leaders who demonstrate reflective thought and scholarship within the context of a culturally diverse society."
While the organizing themes of both the Initial and Advanced programs are clearly articulated, there is much confusion within the present teacher education program. After five years of planning and preparation, a carefully articulated conceptual framework and its accompanying program of instruction has evolved that will eventually replace existing programs. This new framework, referred to as 'the Reconfiguration', has yet to be implemented. In fact, the first phase of 'the Reconfiguration' is not scheduled for implementation until the fall semester of 1998. At that time, change in class requirements for pre-admission to the COE will be in place for entering freshmen. The major portion of the reconfigured education program will not be in place until the second semester of the sophomore year, the time during which admission to the COE is granted. Full implementation of the entire reconfiguration of the COE program will probably not occur until the fall of 2002. Presently, the Unit might best be described as existing between the 'old' conceptual framework and program of instruction, and the newly proposed 'Reconfiguration'. In this interim period, faculty and administrators are awaiting final approvals and continue planning for full implementation.
Though not yet implemented 'reconfiguration' is now a de facto, operating metaphor for the 'old' programs. In fact, in the Design of Professional Education document submitted to the NCATE and the BOE Team, the Unit clearly states, "[This] material should be interpreted much more as 'where we want to go' than as 'where we are'." When asked, most faculty could describe and identify 'the Reconfigured' conceptual framework and model, but could not cite how it applies or can be used to assess the current model under which, technically, they are still operating. Further, very few of the students who were interviewed could articulate either the new 'reconfigured' model or its knowledge base, or relate it to the current model. It would be unfair to suggest that a model does not exist, for indeed, it is very clear that one does. However, in this time of transition at EMU, there is confusion about which theoretical framework and model governs and is used to assess EMU's teacher education programs.
Present program students at the initial level will be largely unaffected by the proposed 'Reconfiguration'. While those faculty most heavily involved in the planning for this change are recommending to their students that they participate in the pilot (one cluster of three classes taken together) for 'the Reconfiguration, by their own admission only about 25% of the students are actually doing so. Advanced program students, on the other hand, are definitely not affected by 'the Reconfiguration'. The 'reconfiguration' does not address the advanced degree programs in any way. They do expect that once programs at the initial level are fully implemented, these may then also be reorganized.
Per 'reconfiguration' at the basic level, students presently enrolled in teacher preparation programs are expected to be knowledgeable in academic content, proficient in the school subjects in which they specialize, and competent and able to make teaching content meaningful to students. Teacher education students recommended for certification are viewed as 'emerging' professionals, fully on the pathway to professional competence. Students are expected to be caring, humanistic professionals who are 'child-centered'. They are expected to be reflective decision-makers. For the Unit student, reflection occurs during planning, teaching, assessing, evaluating and revising, throughout all course work. Further, they are prepared to understand, accept, and work sensitively with diversity in all its dimensions. Finally, they must be comfortable and confident with technology and its various applications for teaching and learning.
In 'the Reconfiguration' the Unit focuses on five principles of teacher education. These are:
1. Developing Knowledge: The intent of this principle is to increase the depth of subject matter knowledge with an emphasis on complex learner outcomes.
2. Developing Competence Through Coordinated Learning and Instruction. This principle reflects a structure and vision of pedagogy that provides conceptual integration of courses and field placements, subject-matter knowledge and pedagogy across required courses.
3. Gaining Competence in and Through Technology. Through this principle, technology is infused throughout the teacher preparation program and is viewed as an integral component of the teaching/learning process.
4. Developing Competence through Real-World Experiences. With this principle, initial teacher preparation programs provide authentic and varied field experiences, beginning with extensive pre-student teaching experiences.
5. Developing Sensitivity and Contextual Learning through Multicultural Experiences. This principle infuses teacher education with multicultural thinking practices and placements beginning with an early service learning experience.
The Unit's knowledge base is broad and eclectic, ranging from Ball & McDiarmid (1990) and Shulman (1987) for pedagogical content knowledge, and Tom & Valli, (1990) for beginning teachers, to Berliner (1986), Cochran-Smith, (1990), and Connelly & Clandinin, (1987) for reflective inquiry in teaching. The 'Reconfigured' framework and knowledge base are appropriate and consistent with the institution's mission.
Faculty members in the Unit have been diligent over the last 5 years to ensure that they not only understand the specifics of this new model and its concomitant theory, but its implications in their own practice and that of cooperating teachers with whom they place teacher education students.
The Unit ensures that each faculty member integrates the 'reconfigured' model into their syllabi and teaching. A review of course syllabi across various programs and interviews with individual faculty supports the widespread integration of the model into their teaching.
Since each advanced program utilizes a different conceptual model, they are largely unaffected by the 'reconfiguration'. However, a perusal of advanced program syllabi shows that they are diligent about integrating their particular model into their teaching.
Teacher education faculty are relatively articulate about the 'reconfigured' model and can identify examples in their own teaching. Reflection on the relationship of the model to their teaching is a continuous and ongoing process. However, the same cannot be said about student teachers and program students. During interviews, most student teachers were confused and unable to articulate even the most basic aspects of the model.
Efforts have been made to incorporate multicultural and global perspectives into the curriculum including consideration of materials and addressing the needs of all children. Generally, faculty are articulate about the theory and research which establishes this aspect of the knowledge base, and are clear about the relationship of the model to their teaching about multicultural and global issues. Teacher education students stated specifically that they were trained to consider the needs of various learners in all their teaching, but were not able to connect the 'Reconfiguration' model to their planning, preparation, and execution of their teaching.
There has been great care taken to ensure that there is coherence between the conceptual framework, student outcomes, field experiences, instruction, and assessment. In fact, 'the Reconfiguration' began as the result of serious discussions about the lack of coherence in course selection among program students.
Efforts at preparing appropriate performance assessment measures for teaching outcomes are clear. Faculty and students were able to articulate these with little effort. When interviewed, several students confirmed the breadth of assessment techniques. Their progress is assessed through portfolios (in some cases, implemented over 3 years ago), class papers, journals, teaching Units, teacher observations, teaching lessons, peer grading, video taping lesson presentations, and final exams in classes. Field experiences are continuously monitored to ensure that teacher education students will have the opportunity to observe and implement instruction that is inviting.
Observation of classes and interviews with students show that a variety of strategies are used by many instructors. Whole class discussions, higher order questioning and cooperative groups, presentation of projects and lecture were observed. Through interviews with students it was evident that some faculty members incorporate the conceptual framework throughout their courses. Some students used the framework in association with course learning objectives. However, many students were unable to define the framework or even recognize the term "knowledge base". In talking with students and in observations, evidence of use of cultural diversity and exceptionalities is included in the daily structure of lessons. Students gave examples of activities and knowledge gained in course work on diversity.
A study of available course syllabi shows that reflection, multicultural and diversity issues and research are incorporated throughout courses. For example, the syllabus for Educational Psychology, EDPS 322, Human Development and Learning, includes outcomes in reflective understanding identifying cognitive characteristics for developmental stages and understanding critical issues.
Course syllabi were also monitored at the advanced level. Consistency in the use of best practices is evident in the syllabi reviewed. In interviews with graduate students, clear and high expectations were evident on the syllabi and many teaching strategies and instructional methods are used; i.e., class discussions related to reflection, hands on activities such as counseling and role playing, and extensive use of research. The syllabus for Graduate Education Counseling, course GDCN 612, The School Counselor, clearly shows this effort at best practice
The COE Council has adopted and promulgated a policy statement that sets clear guidelines for syllabi that include references to the conceptual framework, theme, and purpose of the course. Further this policy outlines the criteria that must be present; "established research, content, essential knowledge, adequacy of objectives, and logical and coherent organization."
The students evaluate courses each semester. Evidence showing how the evaluations are to be used for improvement of teaching within the Unit is found in the teacher contract. Although courses are regularly evaluated, a theme among students finds the feeling that the student evaluations of instructor and the course have dubious merit in COE instructor evaluation.
Field experiences include at least 100 hours of pre-student teaching, extensive contacts with children in a classroom setting for multiple course requirements, as well as a 15 week culminating student teaching experience. In Special Education, the field experience requires all of the aforementioned as well as an additional 15 week placement in a special education setting. Although there are approximately 500 graduates per semester, careful consideration is given to matching students with cooperating teachers. Student teachers are given substantial support and are frequently visited by the COE supervisor. Through observations, personal interviews, and electronic data exchange, students expressed a high level of satisfaction and comfort with the student teaching experience. Students are required to explicitly demonstrate their ability to integrate general, content and professional studies. Examples that Unit students and student teachers cited in describing their work in the schools and a perusal of portfolios and Unit lessons confirms that this integration does occur.
The Office of Collaborative Education (OCE) develops programs for improvement of the quality of education in collaborative programs with area schools and close interaction with personnel. The OCE is continually involved in a collaborative school improvement process (C-SIP), a consortium group that develops school-university partnerships (Consociate Schools), and the Comer Schools project, an association with a major urban school district.
B. Weaknesses Corrected Since the Previous Visit:
I.A. Previously Met with a Weakness. Design of Curriculum. (Basic) Assessment of programs designed around the knowledge base has not yet been undertaken.
Evidence suggests that students are assessed on the knowledge base through a variety of assessment strategies.
I.A. Previously Met with a Weakness. Design of Curriculum. (Basic) The knowledge base has not yet been fully communicated to constituencies external to the institution.
Evidence indicates that the knowledge base has been communicated to the several constituencies involved in the preparation of teachers, including consociate schools.
I.A. Previously not Met. Design of Curriculum. (Advanced) The knowledge bases articulated at the advanced level are not uniformly reflected in curricular design, course syllabi, instructional design, practice, and evaluation nor are models conceptualized for some knowledge bases presented.
Advanced programs evidences clearly articulated knowledge bases that were supported by a Unit curriculum design policy. The instructional design showed clear evidence of a variety of instructional strategies and teaching methods.
I.C. (Old I.D.) Previously Met with a Weakness. Content of the Curriculum-Speciality Studies. (Initial) The guidelines and standards for the Professional Learned Societies in School Psychology, Mathematics, and Physical Education have not been fully utilized in the development of an appropriate sequence of courses.
The School Psychology program has been discontinued. The Physical Education and Mathematics programs fully meet all Professional Learned Society standards.
I.G. (Old I.B.) Previously Met with a Weakness. Delivery of the Curriculum. (Initial) Some syllabi do not show the various approaches and methods of best practice and current research.
A review of syllabi at both initial and advanced levels clearly indicates the presence of a variety of approaches to learning that are supported and evidenced by projects and readings that reflect best practice and current research.
C. Continuing Weaknesses From Previous Visit:
I.C. (Old I.D.) Previously Met with a Weakness. Content of the Curriculum-Speciality Studies. (Initial) The elementary education program is not in compliance with ACEI standards.
The elementary education program has still not met the
requirements of its professional learned society, ACEI.
D. New Weakness:
I.A. Design of Curriculum. There is a lack of program articulation to students and faculty.
The 'Reconfiguration' model, while still in the planning stages, has become the predominant conceptual theme in the Unit. Students and faculty are unable to articulate the knowledge base of the reconfigured program.
CATEGORY 2: CANDIDATES IN PROFESSIONAL PROGRAMS
A. Observations
To determine the qualifications of students at the initial level, all applications are screened for the following characteristics: an overall GPA (minimum of 2.5), a 2.5 GPA in the major or three minors in elementary; tests of basic skills in reading, writing, including an autobiographical statement, mathematical competence; health status; social and emotional adjustment; and, freedom from any kind of academic or administrative probation. The result of this screening is that of 1106 applications from July 1, 1996-June 30, 1997, 83% or 917 of 1,106 applications were accepted for students who had applied for the initial program. Alternate means of admission are available for those who may not automatically meet entrance qualifications. The office of the Associate Dean for Student Affairs in the Unit monitors the application process.
At the advanced level, the Graduate School delineates admissions for all programs for the Master's, Specialist, and doctoral degrees. All applications for graduate degrees are screened for GPA (Master's 2.5 or 2.75 in last half of the undergraduate program; Specialist, 3.3; doctor's, 3.3). Other requirements include a valid teaching certificate, letters of recommendation, scores on the Graduate Record Examination, and personal interviews. These requirements differ somewhat by both degree level and department. Criteria for conditional admission and international students are outlined in the Graduate Catalog. The office of the Associate Dean for Student affairs processes the applications for the Graduate School. Further, each department designates a graduate advisor who is responsible for the monitoring of student progress. This person functions similar to a 'Director of Graduate Studies.'
Financial assistance is available for students at both levels. The Division of Enrollment Services and a central administration Vice President are responsible for the recruitment and financial opportunities for all students in the institution. For example, the Presidential Scholarship program provides some $6.4 million for highly talented students. The Regent Scholarship provides $2,000 per year for four years. Specifically in the College of Education, the Unit awarded some 55 scholarships from a variety of donor sources. Some teaching assistantships are available for students at the advanced level. This source of support for advanced level students has grown with the increasing grant moneys that have been received in very recent years.
Minority recruitment functions with activities on both the all-university level as well as at the Unit level. There are a dozen or more activities at the all-university level which bring undergraduate students to campus. Those activities range from on-site admissions conducted at inner-city Detroit high schools to recruitment programs for Hispanic students in south Texas, Michigan, and Ohio, to the regional NSSFNS (National Scholarship Service and fund for Negro Students) fair. At the Unit level, three major programs recruit minority students to Unit programs. The Urban Teacher Program prepares teachers who indicate they are interested in teaching in urban schools. Students are funneled into the program through Wayne County Community College, Wayne State University, and through the Unit at Eastern Michigan University.
The YES (Young Educators Society), started at by Eastern Michigan University, the Michigan Association for Teacher Educators, the Michigan Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Domino's Pizza, and the University of Michigan is a major source of recruitment for the Unit at Eastern Michigan University because of the centralized role that the Unit has played in the formation of YES and in the continuing leadership of Dr. Robbie Johnson. The purposes of YES all fall basically into its major purpose, the recruitment of minority students as future educators.
The Unit also cooperates with Oakland Community College in a program which is similar to the Urban Teacher Program only on a smaller scale. A variety of services are provided through the program, such as counseling, planning of transfer programs, mentoring, and the like. This program has provided as many as 27 African American students who were eligible to transfer to Eastern Michigan and into the Unit.
The results of the several recruitment activities at the initial level suggest that the student body is approximately as diverse as the community from which the Unit draws its population. At approximately 12% of African American, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander, and Native American together, the recruitment efforts continue to provide the Unit with a diverse student body at the initial level.
At the advanced level, the Graduate School administers the Minority
Graduate Assistantship program. Each award covers full tuition, variou sfees, and a stipend of $4800 per year. It also administers the Martin Luther King, Jr./Cesar Chavez/Rosa Parks Future Faculty Program which offers an award of up to $15,000 per year to a Master's student and up to $25,000 per year to a doctoral student. Faculty members with grants have also pursued the recruitment of Graduate Students. The result of such recruitment activities indicates that the number of graduate students has grown to approximately 12 % in 1997. In this regard, the recruitment effort at the advanced level is as successful as that of the initial recruitment effort. Both efforts have yielded a diverse student body.
The advisement of advanced level students is basically related to the individual processing and admission of students through the Graduate School. Students are assigned an advisor in a program. That person works with the student in advising of courses that are required for program completion, projects or thesis, and examinations. That process seems to be effective for students as they work through programs. There were few, if any, student complaints through interviews with graduate students about the advising at the advanced level.
At the initial level, however, student complaints and advisor complaints were heard. In both group and individual interviews, students complained that the group advising in which they participate does not meet their needs, that there are too many students in those groups, and that individual questions cannot be handled effectively. This complaint was especially heard from transfer and post-baccalaureate students who obviously have special needs. In an observation of a group advising session of 28 new students to one advisor, it did appear that a large number of students were attempting to both receive information and ask questions about their programs. It is difficult to conclude that all of their questions were answered. The session was but an hour long; with 28 to 1, the probability that all individual questions were answered is not very high. In any case, the advisement of students through the group advising process seems to pose problems for students EVEN THOUGH they are assigned to an individual advisor in a program area.
Individual advisors also complained about the advising process. Those who conduct the group advising sessions indicate that they suspect that all questions are not answered even though they feel that they try very hard to answer all questions. They do direct students to program area advisors to obtain specific help with technical questions about program requirements and how they be met, particularly for transfer and post-baccalaureate students. Individual advisors, particularly in heavily populated programs such as elementary education, complained about the heavy advising load. Individual advisors in smaller programs, such as Early Childhood Education, did not feel that their advising loads were too heavy.
In addition to the requirements for entrance to both initial and advanced programs in the Unit, there are also steps that serve both as ways of retaining and ensuring student competence. For advanced programs, each program has its own set of requirements for showing both retention and competence. Those requirements could be a set of courses relating to the development of the conceptual framework and knowledge base; the completion of portfolio which incorporates certain kinds of content (examples of work indicating that the student is proceeding toward own stated goals; examples of work showing the quality ability to conduct research); meeting with an advisor upon completion of approximately half of the course work; completion of a thesis or project; and, completion of coursework with a specific GPA. An example of a portfolio at this level in special education provides the reader with a very clear example of the student's work for others to examine, evaluate, critique, and give feedback, with appropriate Email addresses for that purpose. The use of technology was definitely a part of this work. These examples indicate some of the ways in which both retention and assurance of competence are manifested at the advanced level.
At the Initial level, although all plans for the retention and assurance of competence of initially licensed teachers are not complete and not completely implemented, each student is now required to develop and present a professional portfolio to an educational audience. One example of a student teaching portfolio contained a teaching unit in English Education and other categories as well: a personal mission statement, field placement, professional objectives and purpose, personal resume, and the unit itself.
Student teaching is another point where the assurance of student competence is examined. In order to student teach a student must apply and meet certain eligibility criteria and prerequisite course work which are published in the Professional Education Supplement to the Eastern Michigan University Bulletin, 1997-98. Once admitted to student teaching for a particular semester, each student is evaluated by the cooperating teacher and university supervisor twice during the semester - mid and final. Video taping is a part of this process with the final evaluation becoming a permanent part of the credential file.
In the future, the 21 goals of the teacher education program in the categories of: 1) Knowledgeable in Subject Matter, 2) Technology, 3) Professionals, 4) Caring, 5) Reflective Decision-Maker, and, )Diversity will be assessed in a matrix of ways. Initial teachers will be assessed through the development of an instruction unit, work samples, an inclusion journal, a conference presentation, case study analysis, a concept map, and autobiographical essay, and an action research study.
B. Weaknesses Corrected from the Previous Visit
None.
C. Weakness Continued from the Previous Visit
II.C. Initial Only (Old III.C.) Monitoring and Advising the Progress of Candidates. Advising loads are not equally distributed throughout the Unit and some students in basic programs are not well served.
Faculty loads for advising seem to vary from specific programs where there are fewer students to those larger programs such as teacher education where faculty may have 100 to 150 student advisees. Transfer students and post-baccalaureate students in teacher education may not be figured into these loads.
D. New Weaknesses
None
A. Observation
The faculty in the professional education Unit are well qualified for their assignments both in terms of their education and their experience. Over eighty percent of the full-time faculty have doctorates. In addition, a diverse population represents the Unit as over fifteen percent of the faculty are from minority groups. This population includes two American Indian, four Asian Pacific, eleven African American, and one Hispanic faculty members. The commitment to hiring a diverse faculty is evident by the College of Education's initiative within EMU's recent Affirmative Action Plan to recruit more minorities and women as full-time faculty members.
Although part-time lecturers also meet the minimum qualifications for their appointments, their use does not appear to have decreased since the last visit. During the Fall Semester, 1996, part-time lecturers taught slightly over twenty-nine percent of the sections offered by the College of Education as compared to over twenty-six percent of the sections in 1992. This practice continues to place an excessive advisement load on the full-time faculty, especially in the Teacher Education Department since individuals often meet with between 150-200 undergraduate students a year. Undergraduate students stated that they often received inaccurate and contradictory information from their faculty advisors. The fact that the program is between the 'old' program and the 'reconfigured' program seems to have contributed to the confusion among students and faculty regarding course requirements. On the other hand, students at the advanced level were more than complimentary of their advisors and their advisement process.
The contract negotiated between the university and the EMU AAUP stipulates a twelve credit hour teaching load for faculty. Interviews with faculty indicate that most teach a combination of undergraduate and graduate courses and that most teach between nine and twelve credits each during both Fall and Winter semesters. The teaching assignments for Spring and Summer semesters are normally six credit hours. Reductions in course load can be negotiated for involvement in special projects or assignments. The load for the supervision of student teachers does not exceed eighteen students. At the initial level, cooperating teachers must have appropriate certification at the grade level or for the subject area they are teaching, have demonstrated success in teaching students, be interested in working with prospective teachers, hold at least a master's degree, have at least three years of successful teaching experience, and be recommended by the principal of the building in which they work; or, in the case of special education, by the program supervisor. Those that supervise practicum or internship experiences at the advanced level must be highly qualified in terms of degrees, experience, certifications, and other credentials.
Faculty in the College of Education are active as scholars in their field as well as serve their professional organizations at the local, state and national levels. Review of faculty vitae indicates that faculty regularly publish in peer-reviewed, scholarly journals. In addition, faculty routinely make presentations at local, state, regional, and national conferences. The Unit is represented not only in the memberships of many state and national professional organizations, but also in leadership positions within these organizations.
Faculty within the Unit are closely involved with the P-12 community through a variety of collaborative ventures. For example, the EMU Unit is the "university partner" for the Comer Schools and Families Initiative with the Detroit Public Schools. A number of faculty members, both from the Unit and from other disciplines, are involved each semester in the delivery of services to the students and teachers in the eighteen elementary schools involved in this project. Another major collaborative project is Eastern Michigan University's Collaborative School Improvement Program (C-SIP) which offers building/district staff members a method for improving instructional outcomes. The C-SIP process includes teachers as equal stakeholders in the school improvement process by connecting theory and practice at the building level. The two Consociate Schools expand upon the C-SIP concept by facilitating a closer exchange and collaboration of ideas and expertise that more closely links the Unit and the schools. The ultimate goal of the Consociate Schools is to allow the University to train better educators and for the public schools to produce students who are also better prepared. Finally, individual faculty are involved with the P-12 community in a variety of projects not related to the aforementioned collaborative ventures. For example, individual faculty are involved with multicultural reading activities; a Summer Writing Camp for elementary students; various school improvement activities; using science topics as a means to teach multiple subjects; parent involvement activities, and in numerous school improvement activities.
Faculty have numerous opportunities for professional development. In addition to participation in professional meetings at the state, regional and national levels, faculty have access to The Faculty Center for Instructional Excellence (FCIE). The FCIE sponsors workshops and seminars on a variety of topics, including technology, that are of interest to faculty members. Faculty interested in improving or refining their instructional expertise as the result of professional interest or feedback from course evaluations may also contact the FCIE for assistance. In addition, new faculty are assigned mentors from within the department who are available to assist in professional development activities. Interviews with faculty revealed a supportive environment for continued professional development that has been fostered by the Dean of the College of Education.
A standardized course and instructor evaluation form is available for use by the faculty as a means of gathering student input for the purpose of instructional improvement. By virtue of the EMU Contract, the data from this form is to be viewed only by the faculty member and used only by them for their professional improvement. Each department has developed an approved course/instructor evaluation document that is used for the purpose of assessment for promotion and tenure procedures. Also, criteria for and the processes of pursuing promotion and tenure are available to each faculty member. The practice of merit pay based on faculty assessment is prohibited by the EMU contract.
B. Weakness Corrected Since the Previous Visit:
III.C. (Old IV.A) Faculty Qualifications and Composition. Efforts to recruit minority faculty have not produced racial/ethnic diversity that is consistent with the recruitment goal.
Since the last visit, the Unit has increased its minority representation within the faculty to fifteen percent. At least five different ethnic/racial groups are represented within the College of Education. This fact more closely represents the recruitment goal of the Unit.
C. Continuing Weaknesses from Previous Visit:
None
D. New Weaknesses
III.C. (Initial) Professional Assignments of Faculty. The advisement load of the faculty, especially in the Teacher Education Department, does not permit the individual faculty member to adequately advise students.
Faculty in the Unit, especially in the Teacher Education Department, often advise between 150-200 students a year. As a result, students often choose to self-advise.
CATEGORY 4: THE UNIT FOR PROFESSIONAL TEACHER EDUCATION
A. Observations
Eastern Michigan is an autonomous university governed by an eight member Board of Regents, appointed by the Governor, and who are subject to the approval of the Michigan State Senate. Financial support for the University comes from tax money paid for by the people of Michigan and from receipt of student tuition and fees. Management of the University occurs under the leadership of the President of the University and five Vice-Presidents. The Unit is governed through the office of the Vice-President for Academic Affairs. The Unit is one of five colleges at EMU. The other four include the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Business, the College of Health and Human Services, and the College of Technology.
Six established campus bodies (Advanced Programs Committee; Basic Programs Committee; Council/Standing Committee Membership 1997/1998; Personnel Committee;
Planning and Finance Committee; and, Professional and Affiliated Programs Committee)
are charged with roles involving curriculum and academic policy issues. In addition to being consistent with both mission statements of the University and of the Unit, the roles of these six bodies committees are spelled out in the Master Contract. The Master Contract also indicates the duties and responsibilities of the Unit's departments, department heads, and other administrative personnel with respect to tenure, promotion, and retention. Overseeing the delegated responsibilities these six campus committees is the College of Education Council. Policy recommendations are forwarded to the Dean of the College of Education and then to the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs for further approval.
The Unit consists of four departments as well as nine advisory or policy boards/committees. The four departments are Leadership and Counseling, Teacher Education, Special Education, and Health Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. The nine advisory boards include a Student Advisory Committee as well as a Doctoral Program Advisory Committee. Within the Teacher Education Department are six standing committees: personnel, instruction, finance, elections and awards, grade grievance and Basic Elementary and Secondary Education. Professional education faculty are actively involved as committee members and are elected by their peers for usually a two year term. Responsible to the faculty to provide meaningful input to the Department Head, committee members may be re-elected to continuing terms.
The Unit's Planning and Finance Committee is charged with the principal responsibility for planning for the College and the professional education programs of the university. The Planning and Finance Committee reports to the College of Education Council, which gives an opportunity for broader and additional review of recommendations. In addition, the Administrative Staff of the College (dean, associate deans, department heads) is also substantially involved in planning.
The full-time faculty of the Unit has been 116 for several years, even with declining enrollment in the College. For FY98, 116 faculty, plus part-time lecturers, plus spring and summer teaching totals 170.473 FTEF, a 0.4% increase from FY97. The Unit has approximately one faculty member for every 14 students.
The University and the Unit offers only one doctoral program, the EdD in Educational Leadership. All seven active members of the leadership section of the Department of Leadership and Counseling are involved in aspects of the doctoral program. In reviewing the faculty vita, all members of the leadership faculty hold earned doctorates with expertise related to the doctoral program.
Each department both at the initial and the advanced level receives an annual allocation of funds to support professional development and faculty travel. These monies are designated as SS & M (Supplies, Services & Materials) funds and are allocated by individual departments and Department Chairs.
|
|
BUDGETED for Professional Education |
BUDGETED for faculty Professional Development (including travel) |
SPENT on faculty Professional Development (including travel) |
|
1991 |
$9,972,489.00 |
$206.00 |
$291.00 |
|
1992 |
$10,166,355.00 |
$198.00 |
$349.00 |
|
1993 |
$10,780,958.00 |
$210.00 |
$228.00 |
|
1994 |
$10,888,658.00 |
$228.00 |
$249.00 |
|
1995 |
$10,881,221.00 |
$337.17 |
$334.35 |
|
1996 |
$11,131,251.00 |
$405.00 |
$501.00 |
|
1997 |
$11,152,347.00 |
$778.00 |
$900.00 |
In addition, the Provost's Travel Fund is available on a competitive basis to support travel for the presentation of papers. At least 14 College of Education faculty members received support, up to $600 each, from this source during 1996-97 which amounted to 24% of all such awards made. On a competitive basis, other support is available from the university's sabbatical leave program, the faculty research and creative project fellowships, the spring-summer research awards, and the Graduate School research support funds. Also available are the Office of Research Development special projects fund, the Provost's research support awards for new faculty, and the State of Michigan Research Excellence Funds. In addition, the World College provides support for international professional travel and women faculty members are eligible for support under the Josephine Nevins Keal Development Fund Fellowships. Besides travel funds, professional development opportunities for faculty are provided through a variety of university organizations: the Faculty Center for Instructional Excellence (includes workshops/seminars/ programs, consulting on educational issues, new faculty orientation, computer conferences on teaching and learning, and resource materials), the Center for Research Support, the Center for Instructional Computing, and the Collegium for Advanced Studies.
The full-time faculty of the Unit has been 116 for several years. For FY98, there are 116 faculty members, plus part-time lecturers, plus spring and summer teaching totals 170.473 FTEF. This number is only an increase of 0.4% from FY97. The Unit has approximately one faculty member for every 14 students. Over the past several years, the use of part-time lecturers to teach professional education courses has decreased from 165 to 91. This decrease has resulted in an increase in the Unit's full-time faculty. The percent of sections taught by lecturers has followed this pattern:
|
|
COE |
EMU |
|
Fall 1992 |
26.29% |
24.20% |
|
Fall 1993 |
29.03% |
26.28% |
|
Fall 1994 |
27.92% |
24.75% |
|
Fall 1995 |
25.56% |
23.80% |
|
Fall 1996 |
29.08% |
25.98% |
It also should be stated that during interviews with representatives from the Basic Elementary and Secondary Committee, these representatives noted that part-time faculty do not have individual mailboxes and office space or the use of office desks even if requested
Lecturer FTEF has been allocated to the College of Education in
the following amounts :
|
|
Lecturer FTEF |
|
FY 93 |
|
|
FY 94 |
|
|
FY 95 |
|
|
FY 96 |
|
|
FY 97 |
42.18 |
|
FY 98 |
35.05 |
|
|
|
The area of support personnel includes EMU's professional and technical workers and graduate assistants, and the College of Education also makes use of student workers. Through the use of technology, E-Mail usage has increased, therefore lessening the need for traditional clerical services. In addition, the more than $1 million in 'soft money' obtained during FY96 provided for several support personnel. While these persons are primarily responsible for the support of a particular activity, they have provided some relief for the remaining clerical staff.
The Unit's Planning and Finance Committee is charged with the principal responsibility of planning for the Unit and the professional education programs of the university. This committee reports to the College of Education Council, which provides for a broader and additional review of recommendations. In addition, the Administrative Staff of the College (dean, associate deans, department heads) is also substantially involved in planning.
In 1993, the state of Michigan approved a capital outlay program for Eastern Michigan University in excess of $51 million. Included in the program was (a) a relocation of the EMU physical plant; (b) the construction of a new, state-of-the art library building; and (c) the renovation of and relocation to the present library building for a major portion of the College of Education.
The new EMU Library/ Cybrary is scheduled for completion and occupancy in the spring of 1998. Since the last NCATE visit, the Library Acquisitions Budget has doubled from slightly more than $1 million per year to more than $2 million per year. Department of Education related expenditures have increased in the last five years from $116,000 to $122,000. Expenditures for electronic resources have risen over the last three years as much as $30,000 a year. Expenditures in 1996-97 for such resources totalled $134,982. Also during the 1995-96 year, the renovation and expansion of the Instructional Materials Center (housed in and administered by Learning Resources and Technologies Cybrary) began. Completed during Fall Semester 1996, this new facility is a laboratory and a classroom equiped for distance learning and computer applications. This computer-intensive facility, while theoretically available to any university student, is in practice a specialized learning facility for professional education students and faculty and adequately supports the professional education programs of the University. It is used by the Unit in the delivery of distance learning courses for the doctorate in Educational Leadership.
Total library expenditures include:
|
|
Books |
Periodicals |
Electronic Resources |
|
1992/93 |
$272,691 |
$581,215 |
$49,680 |
|
1993/94 |
$537,741 |
$618,280 |
$48,935 |
|
1994/95 |
$605,933 |
$641,196 |
$72,503 |
|
1995/96 1996/97 |
$663,716 $748,241 |
$692,030 $714,417 |
$100,352 $134,982 |
Library holdings include:
|
|
1992/93 |
1996/97 Dec. 1996 latest figure available |
|
volumes |
495,818 |
526,424 |
|
bound periodicals |
109,555 |
121,290 |
|
Total |
605,373 |
647,714 |
|
Gov. Documents |
204,066 |
259,327 |
Policies complied with by the University affirm the admission and the participatory rights of all individuals, regardless of gender, race, color, religion, creed, national or ethnic origin. These include: The Civil Rights Act, Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, Title IX Education Amendments of 1972, and Americans with Disabilities Act.
B. Weaknesses Corrected Since the Previous Visit
IV.A. (Old V.B.) Resources. The dependence of the Unit upon a significant number of part-time lecturers places excessive advising loads on ranked faculty and causes faculty and student dissatisfaction.
A number of full-time faculty positions were not filled in 1996 due to financial reasons: however one person joined the faculty mid-year in 1996-97. And 12 full-time faculty members were hired for the 1997-98 year. There is less reliance on part-time faculty for advising.
IV.A. (Old V.B.) Resources. There is an insufficient number of clerical staff to support the program.
For the five year period 1993 through 1997, the total support staff for the College of Education has (1) remained constant for the number of administrators, (2) declined in the number of clerical staff, and (3) increased considerably in the 'other' category. The number of clerical staff has declined from 21 FTE in 1993 to 19 FTE in 1997. Yet, the number of 'other' support personnel has increased from 42 in 1993 to 96 in 1997.
IV.B. (Old V.B.) Resources. When students do not or cannot sign up for classes on the first day of registration, the classes are often closed. Some students are forced to attend an extra semester in order to enroll in the necessary classes needed for graduation.
The Department of Teacher Education has taken specific improvement steps in technology resulting in the ability to 'override' the system in order to provide a slot for students who need a particular course.
IV.B. (Old V.B.) Resources. Library space and holdings are limited.
The new EMU Library/Cybrary is scheduled for completion and occupancy in the spring of 1998. When that move is complete, the current library space will double to some 218,000 assignable square feet. Financial allocations for the Cybrary continue to increase at the rate of at least $200,000 per year, toward a target increase of $1 million per year over a five-year period.
IV.B. (Old V.B.) Resources. There is a lack of acceptable office space for faculty.
Construction is expected to begin in the spring of 1998 in order to renovate the present Library Building for the use of the College of Education. The entire college faculty will be housed in this building with approximately 86,6000 assignable square feet.
B. Weaknesses Continues From the Previous Visit
None.
C. New Weaknesses.
None.
D. Other
IV.B. (Old V.B) Not all facilities are accessible to individuals with disabilities.
This matter no longer relates to NCATE Standards.
PART III EXEMPLARY PRACTICES None.
EXHIBITS
B. NCATE BOE/STATE OF MICHIGAN JOINT TEAM SCHEDULE ANDINDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED, November 15-19, 1997
Meals "on your own."
Afternoon
Access to EMU web site
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
7:00 p.m.
NCATE Team Meeting
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
Breakfast and lunch "on your own."
All day
Access to EMU web site
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
10:00 a.m.
Joint Team Orientation
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
6:00 p.m.
Dinner
NCATE/State and EMU personnel
Private Dining Room
Bentley's Restaurant, Marriott Hotel
After dinner
Team Meeting
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
After team meeting
Send email questions to group of cooperating teachers and principals for by-Monday-night return message
Conference Room G, Conference Center, Marriott Hotel
Breakfast "on your own."
8:00 a.m. Transportation to campus
Lobby, Marriott Hotel Work Day Access to EMU web site, Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Work Day Refreshments, Boone Hall, Lounge, Room 110
8:30 a.m. William Shelton, President Room 202, Welch Hall
Interviewers: Dale L. Lange and Steve Stegink
8:30 a.m. Georgea Langer, Director COE Office of Collaborative Education, McKenny Union,Gallery II
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, John Halcon, John McIntyre
9:00 a.m. Ronald Collins, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
Welch Hall Room 106
Interviewers: Dale L. Lange and Steve Stegink
9:00 a.m. Group of special methods faculty : Joanne Caniglia, Mathematics; Anne Nerenz, Foreign Language; Margot Duley (former department head, History and Philosophy); David Leapard, Marketing Education; Gerald Jennings, Technology Education; William Tucker, English; John Novak, Biology; Ron Fulkert, Business Education
McKenny Union,Gallery II
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, Gary Christensen, Jim Clatworthy, John Halcon, Debbie
Fancher, John McIntyre, William Yarroch
Those Present: Joanne Caniglia, Mathematics; March Dalbey, English; Margot Duley, History and Philosophy; Ron, Fulkert, Business and Technology; John Hubbard, Foreign Languages; Gerald Jennings, Business and Technology; Dave Leapard, Business and Technology; Earl Meyer, Business and Techology; Steven Moyer, HPERD; Gersham Nelson, History and Philosophy; Ann Nerenz, Foreign Langages; Bill Tucker, English
Gary Christensen interviewed separately: Motoko Tabuse, Professor
of Japanese, Basile Valtadoros, Student of Japanese, and Louise
Patrick, Professor of Music.
9:30 a.m. Walking tour of campus
Leave from northeast entrance to Welch Hall
9:30 a.m. Representatives from the Basic Elementary and Secondary Committee ("Bessie"), a committee internal to Department of Teacher Education- Olga Nelson, Anne Bednar, Betty Barber, Pat Pokay, et al
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Roberta Margo, John McIntyre, Steve Stegink
Those Present: Anne Bednar, Betty Barber, Georgea Langer, Olga
Nelson, Pat Pokay
10:00 a.m. Representatives from Committee on Basic Programs, including Alane Starko, Linda Lewis-White, Dodie French, Joanne Caniglia
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Debbie Fancher, John McIntyre, Roberta Margo
Those Present: Chris Bochlagr, Joanne Caniglia,Dorothea B. French,
Georgia Langer, Linda Lewis-White, Gretchen Otto, Michael J.
Pacionel, Alane Starko
10:30 a.m. College of Education Administrative Staff (Two Associate Deans, Four Department Heads)
Boone Hall, Lounge, Room 110
Interviewers: Gary Christensen, Dale L. Lange
Those Present: James Berry, Michael Bretting, Robbie Johnson,
Kathleen Quinn, Jerry Robbins, Alane Starko, Martha Tack
10:30 a.m. Representatives of the Reconfiguration Task Force, including Marvin
Pasch and Pat Pokay
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, John Halcon, Steve Stegink
12:00-1:30 p.m. Lunch Sandwiches/soup/ice cream/beverages
McKenny Union, Faculty Room
12:45 p.m. Walking tour of campus (Repeat of earlier tour)
Leave from McKenny Union Faculty Room
1:00 p.m. Barry Fish, Dean, College of Arts & Sciences; Thomas Harden, Dean,
College of Technology
Sill Hall, Room 107
Interviewers: Dale L. Lange, Steve Stegink, Bill Yarroch
Those Present: Barry Fish, Thomas Harden
1:00 p.m. Outreach: Service-Learning (Dale Rice), Consociate Schools (Donna Wissbrun, Marylyn Lake), Comer Project (Alison Harmon)
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Jim Clatworthy, Roberta Margo, John McIntyre
Those Present: Alison Harmon, Marilyn Lake, Dale Rice, Donna
Wissbrun
1:30 p.m. Pat Harris, Affirmative Action Officer (Unavailable)
King Hall, Room 310
2:30 p.m. Robert Holkeboer, Dean, Graduate Studies and Research; Patrick Melia, Associate Dean
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Dale L. Lange, Steve Stegick
Those Present: Robert Holkeboer, Patrick Melia
3:30 p.m. Web caucus interview with group of university supervisors of student teaching
Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Interviewers: Debbie Fancher, Dale L. Lange, John McIntyre
Those Present on the Web Caucus: Jan Alverson, Ann Nerenz, Jeffrey A. Liles, Karen K. Tuttle
Supervisor Interviewed on the Phone: John Millington by Steve
Stegink
4:30 p.m. Team post questions for a later group of undergraduate and graduate students on web caucus. Responses expected Boone Hall within 24 hours.
Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Questions were posed, but no responses were obtained.
Students Interviewed:
Dana Sutton, Capri Johnson, Meg Klawiter, Nabila Mezran, Holly
Gosen, Gwen Toth, David Fulford, Tod Cheney, Dristin Smirnow, Linda
Helms, Carrie Smith, Ken Menhard, Rita Miller, Holly Cafeo, Mark
Kane, Leesha Thrower, Tara O'Connor, Doreen Morrison, Johnita Payne,
Brenda Tally, Rebecca Hill, Nicole Hamerink, Michelle Garnbolan
Student Teachers and Supervisors Interviewed:
Supervisor
Kathy Ashton-Miller
Student Teachers
April Brian, Alisa Podzius, Brian Hanson, Kelly Wyatt, Jeff Goodman, Angela D. Hertle
James Dryer.
Classes Observed
Curr 214 - Dr. Willston
Introduction to HEd Leadership - Students Patricia M. Mackmiller,
Jennifer Belisle, Ann H. Many
5:30 p.m. Transportation to Hotel
Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Dinner on Your Own
After Dinner Team Meeting
Marriott Hotel Conference Center, Conference Room G
Breakfast "on your own."
8:00 a.m. Transportation to campus
Lobby, Marriott Hotel Work Day Access to EMU web site
Boone Hall Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab Work Day Refreshments Lounge
Boone Hall, Room 1108:30 a.m. Visit to Estabrook/New Horizon Elementary School and Huron High School Leave with Kathleen Quinn from east entrance, ground level, Boone Hall
Team Participants: Wendy Angello, Debby Fancher
9:00 a.m. Special methods faculty: Chris Bocklage, Gretchen Otto (Art education); Marshall Thomsen (Physics); Steve Moyer (Physical education); Judy Sturgis-Hill (Speech communications); Louise Patrick (Music education)
McKenny Union, Tower Room
Interviewers: Gary Christensen, John McIntyre, Bill Yarroch
Persons Interviewed: Christopher Bocklage, Art Education; Rachel
Brett Harley, Music; Judy Sturgis Hill, Speech Communications;John
Noreck, Biology; Gretchen Otto, Art Education; Louise Patrick, Music;
Jeanne Pietig, Social Foundations; Marshall Thomsen, Physics and
Astronomy
9:00 a.m. Sandra Yee, Learning Resources (Library); Twyla Racz, Library Collection Development; Rhonda Fowler, Librarian (Education); Jennie Meyer McCafferty, Learning Technologies
McKenny Union, Gallery II
Interviewers: Jim Clatworthy, Roberta Margo
Persons Interviewed: Rhonda Fowler, Jennie McCafferty, Twyla Racz,
Sandra Yee.
10:00 a.m. Representatives of the College of Education Council, Jennifer Beller, chair
McKenny, Union, Tower Room
Interviewers: John Halcon, Dale L. Lange, Roberta Margo
Persons Interviewed: Jennifer Beller, Marv Johnson, Quirico S.
Samonte, Alane Starko, Louis Thayer
10:30 Academic Human Resources, Frank Gacioch: McKenny Union, Tower Room
Interviewer: John Halcon
11:00 a.m. Open Meeting. Any member of the Faculty invited. McKenny Union, Tower Room
Interviewers: Gary Christensen, Jim Clatworthy, Dale L. Lange, Bill Yarroch.
Persons Interviewed: Mike Charles, Dorothea French, Sue Grossman,
Elizabeth Johnson, Georgea Langer, Marueen McCormack, Karen
Paciorek
10:00 a.m. Representatives of the Advanced Programs Committee, Winnie Witten, chair
McKenny Union, Tower Room
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, Debby Fancher
Persons Interviewed: Leah Adams, Chris Bocklage, Dorothea
FrenchSue Stickel, Winnie Witten.
12:00-1:30 p.m. Lunch, McKenny Union, Faculty Room
1:30 p.m. Full-time graduate students. McKenny Union, Tower Room
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, Debby Fancher, John Halcon, John McIntyre
Full Time Graduate Students: Michelle White, Kendall Kleis,
Jennifer Zharms, Rebecca Murphy, Elena Ramos, Susanne Hoesli, Holly
Semanske, Lorna Brennan
3:30 p.m. Representatives of the EMU Faculty Council, John Novak, Chair. McKenny
Union, Founders Room
Interviewers: Gary Christensen, Roberta Margo, Bill Yarroch
Persons Interviewed: (List not obtained)
3:30 p.m. COE Student Advisory Committee, Boone Hall, Room 107
Interviewers: Wendy Angello, Debby Fancher, John Halcon
Persons Interviewed: Michelle Bacon, Wendy Rogoruski, Catherine
Volte, Michelle Pect, Barbara Gorenflo
3:30 p.m. Web caucus interview with group of student teachers, Boone Hall, Room 126,
Bonisteel Computer Lab (None Responded)
4:00 p.m. Interactive video session with doctoral students. Library
Interviewers: Dale L. Lange, Roberta Margo
Persons Interviewed: Four doctoral students in a two remote
sites.
Other Interviews:
James McGee, Professor of Political Science - Jim Clatworthy
Robbie Johnson, Associate Dean - Dale L. Lange, Steve Stegink
Alene Starko, Chair, Teacher Education - Steve Stegink
Amy Dale, Principal, Elementary Education - Steve Stegink
Grannine Porigg, Principle, Elementary Education - Steve
Stegink
5:30 p.m. Transportation to Hotel. Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel
Computer Lab
Dinner: On Your Own
Evening Access to EMU Web Site
Marriott Hotel Conference Center, Conference Room G
After Dinner Team Meeting
Marriott Hotel Conference Center, Conference Room G
Breakfast "on your own."
8:00 a.m. Transportation as needed; call 487-1414
Marriott Hotel Lobby
Morning Access to EMU web site
Marriott Hotel Conference Center, Conference Room G
Morning Access to EMU web site
Boone Hall Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Late morning: Transportation to Metro Airport
Marriott Hotel, Lobby
11:30 a.m. Exit Interview, Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel
Computer Lab
Noon: Transportation to Hotel
Boone Hall, Room 126, Bonisteel Computer Lab
Early Afternoon: Transportation to Metro Airport
Marriott Hotel, Lobby
None.