Standard 5

Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.

5a. Qualified faculty

5a.1. Qualifications of the Full- and Part-time Professional Education Faculty
Full and part-time professional education faculty are dedicated and knowledgeable. All faculty in tenure track positions hold terminal degrees in their fields and bring the educational and experiential depth required to provide programs at the baccalaureate, master’s, and doctoral degree levels. Also, all of our extended faculty in Arts & Sciences and Business hold terminal degrees in their content fields (Table 5a.1.1).

5a.2. Qualifications of Faculty Members Without Terminal Degrees

Part-time/adjunct faculty and Graduate Teaching Assistants may not have terminal degrees, but do have experience, expertise and hold masters degrees in the areas in which they teach (Table 5a.2.1).

5a.3. P-12 School Faculty Member Licensure

The unit has affiliation agreements with all P-12 school districts who invite our candidates to complete field experiences. Section II, 2.1 of the agreement form states that the P-12 school agrees: “To provide students of the University an opportunity to work cooperatively in a teacher-learning situation with a teacher certified by the state in which the School is located” (E-exhibit 5a.3.1). A list of our cooperating teachers, their experiences and licensure areas can be found in Table 5a.3.1.

5a.4. Professional Experiences of Higher Education Clinical Faculty in School Settings

The majority of clinical supervisors in our initial programs are retired teachers or principals who are or have been licensed in the fields in which they supervise (Table 5a.4.1). As noted in the Council on Exceptional Children Special Program area report, the Special Education program has two clinical supervisors. Full time faculty in Educational Leadership, who have had experiences as leaders in P-12 schools, supervise their candidates during internships. Fully licensed school counselors provide individual supervision on-site for school counseling interns, doctoral GTAs provide on-campus support in a small group setting and full-time faculty in the department supervise those GTAs.

5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching

5b.1-4 Instruction & Assessment by Professional Education Faculty
All professional education faculty have a thorough understanding of their content areas and the requirements dictated by individual professional, state, and institutional standards. As teacher scholars they recognize and accept the responsibility to share research, educational theory, and current developments in order to prepare our candidates to enter the field as fully trained educational professionals..
Our faculty model best practices for student learning by selecting and demonstrating teaching practices congruent with current research and developments in the fields. Recognizing the need for sensitivity and diversity in student learning, and with an eye toward teaching students the value of reflection, critical thinking, and problem solving, faculty use multiple teaching strategies which include, but are not limited to:

small group work
lecture
cooperative learning
peer teaching
teacher modeling
problem-based learning
guided questioning
oral presentation with technology
case study analysis

Faculty use a number of assessment tools and processes such as case studies, research papers, exams, and oral presentations accompanied by rubrics or scoring guides/criteria to assess student progress. The results of surveys conducted in the fall of 2007 reveal that faculty routinely employ a variety of instruction and assessment strategies designed to address the diverse learning needs of our candidates and reflect best practice. (See the following E-exhibits: 5b.1-4.2, 5b.1-4.3, 5b.1-4.4a, 5b.1-4.4b, 5b.1-4.4c, 5b.1-4.4d and 5b.1-4.5a, 5b.1-4.5b, 5b.1-4.5c, 5b.1-4.5d, 5b.1-4.5e, 5b.1-4.5f, 5b.1-4.5g, 5b.1-4.5h). In addition, in initial programs, faculty assign and assess critical tasks aligned with the conceptual framework and program standards as students’ progress through the program (E-exhibit 5b.1-4.6). Also, a number of the faculty in the unit have been nominated for or have been given awards for excellence in teaching (E-exhibit 5b.1-4.7).

5b.5 Faculty Use of Technology in Instruction

Our professional education faculty use technology in their teaching and encourage their students’ engagement with technology. Faculty use of technology includes but is not limited to:

presentation software
online/course/content management systems (Blackboard)
e-mail
videos
word processing

Faculty teaching in initial programs have LiveText accounts and build and assess assignments within that web-based system. Additionally, the results of two surveys, conducted in the fall of 2007, provide evidence of the range of technology used by faculty in the teacher education unit (E-exhibit 5b.5.1).

5b.6. Candidates Views on the Quality of Teaching

Candidates in initial and advanced programs have an opportunity to evaluate the quality of teaching at the end of each semester. The University provides University Student Assessment of Teaching (USAT) forms (E-exhibit 5b.6.1) and directions for administering the form each semester (E-exhibit 5b.6.2). Using a 5 point Likert Scale, with 5 indicating strongly agree and 1 strongly disagree, institutional means for the fall of 2006 and spring of 2007 ranged from 4.0-4.3 for questions that related to teaching quality, numbers 5-22 (E-exhibit 5b.6.3). Means for the college for the same time period ranged from 4.1-4.5. Table 5b.6.1 displays means for the departments within the college and unit. They ranged from 3.7-4.8. The college tends to score somewhat higher than the university overall, and departmental scores provide evidence that our candidates are satisfied to very satisfied with the quality of faculty teaching.
Another critical component of modeling “best professional practices in teaching” is the element of sound academic advising. Quality advising of students throughout their programs is a commitment of our faculty. The nature and specifics of advising varies by program, but overall, faculty and staff are present in each program to assist candidates with the design and completion of their academic programs. In the spring of 2007, the unit began monitoring student satisfaction with advisement in initial programs. During the registration period, candidates who meet with their advisors are given the opportunity to complete an Advising Experience Evaluation Form (E-exhibit 5b.6.4). Table 5b.6.2 displays the results from the spring of 2007.
The overall satisfaction rate at 73.6% is lower than we wish to see. The Teacher Education Committee members reviewed the results in October of 2007 and were concerned with the findings. Upon closer analysis, it appears that candidates were not paying attention to the statements that were phrased in the negative. The highest rates of dissatisfaction were found in these items while similar statements phrased in the positive yielded high levels of satisfaction; indeed all above 90% an acceptable rate for all initial programs. The form will be altered slightly. The word “not” in the negative phrases will be bolded and in larger font to see whether this makes a difference in the future.

5b.7. Faculty’s Systematic Engagement in Self-assessment Teaching

Faculty is provided support for improvement of instruction through the Office of Instructional Development (OID) which offers opportunities for instruction improvement grants and summer professorships designed to enhance faculty teaching (E-exhibit 5b.7.1). From 2004-2007, faculty in the unit have received $50, 871 in grants (E-exhibit 5b.7.2). In addition, OID coordinates the small group instructional diagnosis (SGID) team. Faculty members are trained assessment facilitators of the SGID process and use their skills to help individual faculty members assess teaching strengths and areas for improvement. Although not a requirement of the tenure and promotion process faculty members are encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity to improve their teaching (E-exhibit 5b.7.3).

University policies for tenure and promotion articulate the need for quality teaching (E-exhibit 5b.7.4). All faculty must have candidates complete course evaluations at the conclusion of each semester. It is expected that the feedback received through the evaluation process where warranted, results in changes in teaching and those changes are reflected upon in annual reviews. The faculty reviews related to promotion and tenure conducted from 2006 to 2007 indicate that the professional education faculty meet and in a number of cases exceed expectations for demonstrating best professional teaching practices (see Table 5b.7.1).

Return to Top

5c. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship

As noted in the mission statement of the university, “With other research universities, the University shares a distinctive responsibility for the discovery, development, preservation, and dissemination of knowledge. Through its sponsorship and encouragement of basic and applied research, scholarship, and creative endeavor, the University contributes to the public well-being” (excerpted from: http://www.und.edu/aboutund/mission.html).

100% of the full-time professional education faculty produce scholarly works and deliver professional presentations at local, state, regional, national, and international conferences. Scholarship is reflected in a broad range of activities that include generating and disseminating new knowledge (empirical research, publications) to the exploration and questioning of the field (curriculum development, presentations, grant writing, and creative activities) each of which complements the mission of our unit and that of the institution. As the scholarship column of the Unit Faculty Information Chart (Table 5a.1.1) demonstrates, the scholarly productivity of our professional education faculty is high. Examples of the scholarly activity of our faculty can be found in the hard copy exhibit room under 5c.1.

Faculty are also recognized by our own academic community with regard to scholarly activity. Each year, awards are given to faculty and departments for outstanding work in the areas of teaching, research and service. In the College of Education and Human Development, two current faculty members, Dr. Richard Landry and Dr. Myrna Olsen have received the highest award given to faculty at the university, the Chester Fritz Distinguished Professor. For a description of this award, see E-exhibit 5c.1. Also, in the spring of 2007 the college initiated an award for outstanding research/scholarship by an individual faculty member (E-exhibit 5c.2). A committee, made up of EHD faculty volunteers and chaired by the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Education, reviews all nominations and rates them on the basis of the relevant criteria for the specific award. A vote is taken, and the winner is selected on the basis of a majority vote. The recipient of the 2007 award was Dr. Sandra Short, in the Department of Physical Education, Exercise Science and Wellness.

5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service

The College of Education and Human Development has a strong commitment to service as affirmed in its mission statement, “Within all three domains – teaching, research, and service, we attempt to form partnerships with community, state, tribal, and national organizations and government, as well as schools and human service agencies, to provide a more comprehensive effort to foster human development and learning” (excerpted from http://www.und.edu/dept/ehd/bylaws.pdf ¶ 2).

Faculty have a visible presence in the area of service as they hold numerous positions on Boards of Directors, work with national, state and regional professional organizations, volunteer in agencies within the community and are actively involved in committees at all levels in the university community. Faculty members are encouraged to collaborate with organizations that have improving student learning, improving teaching, and the preparation of teachers and educational leaders as organizational goals. Many faculty actively engage with P-12 schools and with faculty in other colleges. The UND Science, Mathematics and Engineering Program for Middle Schools and High School Teachers grant awarded in 2007 provides some evidence of such collaboration. Faculty in the College of Education and the College of Arts and Sciences have collaborated to develop coursework to update high school faculty’s knowledge and skills in high need schools throughout the state. A copy of the grant proposal is available in the hardy copy exhibit room under 5d.1. The document entitled Faculty Service Matrix (E-Exhibit 5d.1) provides evidence of the extensive nature of faculty’s commitment to service.

5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance

As noted in the by-laws of the college, non-tenured faculty are evaluated annually and tenured faculty undergo post tenure review every three years (E-exhibits 5e.1). The main responsibility for evaluation within the departments, and so each department in the unit has its own evaluation procedures; however the following procedures are common to all:

Non-Tenured faculty are reviewed annually by a committee of peers and by the department chair.
Tenured faculty are reviewed by a committee of peers every three years.
For each review an evaluation form is completed ranking each area of faculty work (teaching, research and scholarly activity, and service). Specific recommendations for improvement are made where a faculty member is rated “unsatisfactory”.
Faculty prepare a reflective statement and portfolio of materials for the review. Those required materials include student evaluations of courses; course syllabi, evidence of scholarly work and service, and copies of all prior evaluations.

Faculty are expected to take action on recommendations and address progress on areas of weakness in each subsequent review. Examples of departments’ evaluation procedures may be found in the E-exhibit room under 5e.2, 5e.3, 5e.4, 5e.5, and 5e.6.

In general, faculty perform well on the unit’s evaluations. Table 5b.7.1 summarizes faculty performance. In addition examples of individual reviews are available upon request in the Dean’s office.
All non-tenured faculty (both full and part-time) and Graduate Teaching Assistants are evaluated at last once every semester through the student evaluation (USAT) process.

Return to Top

5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

5f.1. Professional Development Is Related to Needs Outlined in Faculty Evaluations

The formative/developmental aspect of faculty evaluation is highly valued by the unit and as noted in the Policy and Guidelines for the College of Education and Human Development for the evaluation of faculty, the process “at the departmental level should involve a conversation about the professional goals and developmental needs of the faculty member being reviewed” (http://www.und.edu/dept/ehd/facultyeval.pdf, ¶ 2). The conversation around goals, when warranted, may relate to the specific areas for growth recommended in the annual review. In addition, faculty set goals for distribution of time across teaching, scholarship and service which must be approved by the department chair and where appropriate may tie in with recommendations made during the faculty review process. A copy of the Faculty Description Form is available in the E-exhibits under 5f.1.1. The goal setting process provides the framework for professional development of faculty as related to evaluation.

5f.2. Professional Development Activities
A wide variety of professional development is available to faculty. Financial support is provided to individual faculty members at several levels. For example, each department is allocated dollars that are dedicated to supporting faculty professional development. These funds may be spent to support travel, participate in professional meetings or purchase materials to support professional development. In addition, the Dean's Office in the College of Education and Human Development has a pool of money available to faculty members on a competitive basis to support travel.
Within the last year, the College of Education and Human Development created the position of Associate Dean for Research. The person in this position works with faculty to promote their scholarly endeavors. As an example in December of 2007, the Colleges of Nursing, Arts & Sciences and Education and Human Development sponsored a daylong workshop in grant writing. Handouts of that day are available in the hard copy exhibit room under 5f.2
At the university level, the Office of Instructional Development (E-exhibit 5b.7.1) and the Office of Research and Program Development (E-exhibit 5f. 2.1) have financial resources available to support faculty professional development.
New faculty participate in the Alice T. Clark Mentoring Program supported through the university. The program was created to support new faculty members as they develop contacts with peers, learn about the university’s expectations, share ideas about effective teaching and successful research endeavors, and generally begin their academic career at UND with the support of an experienced peer. The Office of Instructional Development Director is responsible for planning the year-long experience and providing a stipend for participation.
The university and the colleges also support several opportunities for professional development such as the College of Education and Human Development’s Rose Isabelle Kelly Fischer Endowed Professorship. The endowment is used for the advancement of knowledge and scholarship in the various fields of education provided through the College of Education and Human Development (E-exhibit 5f.2.3).
Faculty members are also supported for developmental leaves to advance their teaching or scholarship. Developmental leave opportunities are available after six years of full-time service to the University (E-exhibit 5f.2.4). Eight faculty in the unit have been awarded leaves since 2002.

At the university level, faculty lecture series and brown bag lunches sponsored by Office of Instructional Development on a regular basis provide a forum for sharing faculty research and other scholarly contributions as well as support interdisciplinary efforts (E-exhibit 5f.2.5). As well mini-courses are available to faculty in staff through U2: The University Within the University and include technology related workshops (E-exhibit 5f.2.6). A series of technology workshops is also offered by the Center for Learning Technologies/ITSS on a regular basis. In addition, CILT/ITSS will work individually with faculty to address their technology related needs (see 5f.2.7 in E-exhibits).

5f.3. Faculty Participation in Professional Development Activities

Faculty in the unit regularly participate in a variety of professional development activities. Table 5f.3.1 provides a sample listing of activities in which faculty have engaged in the last three years.

Hard Copy Exhibits in Support of Standard 5
5c.1: Samples of Scholarly Activity
5d.1: Math, Science, Engineering Grant Proposal
5f.2: Grant Writing Workshop Handouts

Return to Top