College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes
1/23/07
Attendees (representing):
Kathleen Carpenter (Staff)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Sherry Markel (Chairs)
Catherine Medina (ESP)
Frances Riemer (EDL)
Sandy Stone (T&L)
Adiam Tesfay (Graduate Students)
1.
Updates
T&L (Sandy Stone): T&L had a very positive faculty meeting and discussed student teaching
recommendations that were “good for the students”. Service, scholarship, and teaching requirements for
Annual Review were discussed; and Dr. Markel sent notes to faculty. There seems to be hope of
consensus by next meeting. Various ideas for the changing of chair were discussed, including selection of
an interim T&L chair for next year, but many options are still under discussion/consideration.
ESP (Catherine Medina): ESP had some concerns about the timing of NCATE, with Chairs stepping
down and whether the department was ready for collecting data. A few people reported difficulties
getting into Task Stream with the program code. The criteria for annual review have not been articulated
yet. A group within ESP is addressing the possible addition of “Hispanics” to Goal 4: Be a national
leading college of education serving Native Americans. Submission of grants with Yuma needs to be
clarified. (Additional information provided by SCCP members: Even though there is a change in
administrators, NCATE work is still proceeding. Dr. Sandy Stone recommended Bill Stone to those who
needed additional “around the pod” help on Task Stream. The on-line Task Stream demonstration is
quite easy and useful. The TAG team in Room 216 is also on-call to faculty. T&L has considerable
experience with Task Strea, and are feeling quite comfortable with it. Issuance of Yuma IRs will be done
by Yuma after December, 2007. Doctorates will not be affected.)
EDL (Frances Riemer): EDL is working on documents that need to be in place for the resubmission of
EDL program reports to the Arizona State Board of Education. The EDL Chair search is proceeding well.
Scheduling of classes is going forward in a deliberate manner. The Honors Department request regarding
an Honors Introduction to Education course is still under consideration. More time is needed to discuss
NCATE.
Students (Adiam Tesfay): Students seem to be getting ready for graduation. (Additional information
provided by SCCP members: Students are invited to the Hot Chocolate and Cookie Blast, Sept. 25, and
the Chat with the Dean, March 29, will have a Meet-Me-Line for off-campus student participation.)
Chairs (Sherry Markel): BME 430, the S.E.I. requirement, has been approved for certification
retroactively by the Arizona Department of Education.
Associate Dean (Gypsy Denzine): We have been working with Yuma on their State Board Review. The
course delivery definitions for the institution have been approved (See addendum at bottom of these
minutes.)
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 1 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Staff (Kathleen Carpenter): Ms. Carpenter suggested that a Staff Meeting would be welcomed soon.
(This will be Friday, Feb. 2, at 9:00.)
Other:
• Dr. Medina asked whether Distance Learning provided technology equipment. (Usually only for
distance learning faculty, but sometimes half/half for on campus.)
• The GEAR UP grant launching with Governor Napolitano will be Tuesday, 1/30.
• Dr. Medina was congratulated on being selected as an ombuds person.
• The Provost’s final clarifications/suggestions/edits for the Procedures and Criteria for
Performance Review will be forthcoming.
2.
SCCP Priority Indicators of Success
Dr. Kain paralleled his personal goals with the indicators of success compiled from SCCP the previous
meeting (see attached).
• Successfully guide processes related to accreditation/program approval. (Indicator 1.1)
• Complete revision and approval of personnel procedures and criteria (drawn from 04-05 task
forces). (Goal 5 indicators)
• Enhance college recruitment and retention efforts. (Indicator 1.3. Marketing is also interviewing
students to make marketing more effective.)
• Improve data processes for COE (e.g., “scorecard”). (Mentioned in several indicators)
The indicators will be tracked for a report at the end of the year.
3.
TAG Support
Concern was expressed as to whether there was sufficient technological help for NCATE. Dr. Denzine is
working with Paul Alley on a staffing plan. Because of this, student worker and others’ hours have been
increased. Additionally, part of the time of the tech person who has been added at the AZ K-12 Center is
dedicated to assisting faculty with technology. Working with Business and Engineering, their students
have been a great support for our TAG group. Sharon Gorman, the Web CT person from E-Learning, has
also been most helpful. There is a need for more media support for students, and this is being considered.
4.
C.O.E. Garden
There has been an unofficial garden in the front of the Eastburn building. An “official” garden has been
endorsed by T&L. There was concern about the upkeep, watering, and year-to-year oversight. T&L has
made a commitment that the garden would be part of their science program and would be incorporated
into their classes. The department has committed to maintaining the garden both daily and from year to
year. A plan is under development in cooperation with Mr. Manley, Ms. Redsteer, and the Grounds
Department. SCCP endorsed a college garden if it is approved by the Grounds Department (since C.O.E.
does not have authority over the land outside our building).
5.
Birthday Celebration
S.C.C.P. decided that an email will be sent each month, rather than having a party, to celebrate birthdays
because of lack of attendance at the monthly party.
6.
Opportunities for Learning
The study group on faculty governance is leaning toward faculty rejuvenation. A talk on the scholarship
of teaching and learning in a research intensive institution will be on March 15 at both noon for our
college and 2:00 for the university. Various ways of reporting sabbaticals were given (Brown Bags,
reports to individual departments, etc.) Involvement of doctoral students in discussions was discussed
and encouraged.
7.
Childcare Center
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 2 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
After much work by a task force, President Haeger has directed that a Childcare Center should be
proposed as an academic program through the college. Dr. Riemer expressed that there should be an
institutional commitment, as well as our college, since this is a student and faculty retention issue and
could involve other colleges for health, speech, dental services, etc. Dr. Kain said that this needs to get on
the Strategic Plan which would open doors for other funding. Some of the state’s early childhood money
(Proposition 203) for certification of early childhood teachers might be available.
8.
Faculty Meeting Next Week
A tentative faculty meeting agenda was presented to SCCP. Additions to it should be to Dr. Kain by
Friday, 1/26.
9.
SOE/Annual Review Coordination
Whether to integrate the SOE with the Annual Review through our own created tool or by purchase of the
“Sedona Project”, a commercial product, had several questions. (“Sedona” is accessible through Internet
Explorer at https://sedonaweb.com/) Consideration should be given as to how it would connect with
Peoplesoft, scheduling, other college systems, NCATE requirements, F.S.C. and Chair use, etc. Dr. Stone
cautioned that whatever is used should be able to be personalized (e.g., scan artifacts, etc.) Dr. Denzine
said that this was definitely being considered.
10.
Homework
Dr. Kain asked that the SCCP members read “Becoming More Effecting Learning Organizations:
Clarifying Goals and Evaluating Outcomes” by Ruben. Ruben, B. D. (2004). Excellence in higher
education: Eight fundamental challenges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (pp. 95-116).
Addendum (from AADR Subcommittee Meeting, Class Delivery Mode Definitions)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Face-to-face: Classes delivered in a traditional classroom setting where students and faculty
interact in person. Class may have web enhancement such as online grade rosters of a Vista shell,
but web enhancement cannot be a substitute for seat time.
Online asynchronous (not real-time): Classes delivered on the web. Class materials can be
reviewed anytime, anyplace. All presentation, discussion, and activities are online with no
specified time-frame for activities other than assignment deadlines. Basic technology needs
include a computer, a web browser, and an Internet connection.
Online synchronous (real-time): Classes delivered on the web that may have scheduled meeting
times for online activities such as chats, web conferencing, or specified quiz or test times.
ITV: Instructional television. Two-way audio/video links originating and receiving classrooms.
Class participation is synchronous (real-time); students must attend class in a NAUNet classroom.
All required equipment is present in the classroom. Class may have web enhancement, but it
cannot be a substitute for seat time.
Satellite: Type of ITV class taped for later delivery via satellite link using UniversityHouse.
Students must subscribe to the Echostar service and Dish Network. Web enhancement cannot be
a substitute for seat time.
Hybrid: Classes that use more than one mode of delivery to accomplish the prescribed seat time.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 3 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes 2/12/07
Attendees (representing):
Kathleen Carpenter (Staff)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Catherine Medina (ESP)
Frances Riemer (EDL)
Tom DeStefano (EPS)
1.
COE Garden
There was general support from faculty and staff for a COE garden, as long as someone commits
to taking care of it. Three suggestions were brought to S.C.C.P. that will be researched further:
• Use of existing greenhouse facilities on campus.
• Consideration of a greenhouse on COE grounds.
• Use of an area at Killip School.
2.
University Strategic Plan
The draft of University Strategic Plan is available on the web at: http://www4.nau.edu/pair/ , and
all are invited to read and comment on it either electronically or at roundtables. Comments are
viewable by everyone. Some comments show similarities to some of our college’s questions on
goals.
3.
Faculty Research Center Information
Staff will be included in the emails about brown bags and research symposia since some staff are
interested in attending these.
4.
College Climate
There was discussion of the college climate. Factors contributing to it included: the pains of
change, need for quick decision-making, balancing normal work and NCATE, the need for
identifying the stressors, damaging rumors, democracy of the climate, P&T decisions,
organizational dimensions, etc.
Potential means of establishing a positive environment includes reiterating the value of the
endpoint of NCATE work, value of uncovering some things that will add quality to courses;
establishment and refining of prerequisites, administrative-led Brown Bags with small groups of
faculty. Individual meetings with faculty and administration (including Chairs), faculty being
brought up-to-date on positive moves (e.g., some changes made in the APPEL lab for lowperforming students) and dilemmas that faculty presently don’t see, value of Task Stream for
ease of grading once the learning curve was past (One SCCP member was definitely against
Task Stream but is a now a proponent of it when she realized it took her 30 minutes for grading
what previously took her 1 hour and 15 min.)
Avenues already in place are times when the dean is available in the student lounge, chairs
working to make it a place where their faculty can work at their best, realizing the problems with
Task Stream’s acceptance are similar to SOE acceptance – change hard, but very useful now.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 4 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Administrators were encouraged to speak individually or in small groups with faculty to and to
communicate items that are having a positive impact for faculty and students).
5.
“Score Card” – Indicators for Success
S.C.C.P. read “Becoming More Effective Learning Organizations: Clarifying Goals and
Evaluating Outcomes” (Ruben, B.D. (2004). Excellence in higher education: Eight fundamental
challenges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (pp. 95-116)). There was a discussion of how one
determines success since the department holds the score card and tries to balance between the
objective, easily quantifiable, and the subjective, somewhat judgmental, elements. Some means
being utilized to measure our impact and clarify so far are the use of NCATE SPA reports, Task
Stream, Conceptual Framework, Goals, , use of AEPA to analyze results and assist students who
potentially would have problems, etc. There are two ways to look at a balance, through strategic
definitions and goals. How do we change what we do? How do we tie incentives to these?
6.
Selection of Goal for this year
The SCCP decided that there were enough new initiatives in COE for this year, so their
concentration would be on NCATE work and the Performance Criteria document rather than
selecting new strategies to work on for goals.
7.
Conceptual Framework
Discussion of how the Conceptual Framework ties to SPAs (i.e., program reports for professional
organizations) and goals in the local units will be deferred to the next meeting. The Conceptual
Framework is available on the ACI (Assessment & Continuous Improvement) part of the COE
webpage, complete with executive summary and full document.
8.
Departmental Web Link
There is a new link on the COE website: “Degrees and Programs”, which will make our degrees
and programs easier to locate.
9.
Agenda Items
Dr. Kain welcomes agenda items from the SCCP. If they could be sent at least two days before
the meeting, it would facilitate communication with the entire group.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 5 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
#16. COE should seek national accreditation for teacher education.
2003
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Don't Know
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 6 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
No rthern Arizon a
Un iversity
Conceptual Framework of the Professional Education Unit
Vision Statement
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow's opportunities.
The professional education unit at Northern Arizona University seeks to prepare
educational leaders who create tomorrow's opportunities for young people: opportunities to
learn, opportunities to improve their lives, their communities, and prospects for the future. We
strive to create a web of inquiry, exploration, and dialog—through direct personal interaction and
mediated by technology—that invites all members of the education community to come together
to use discovery, innovation and collaboration to improve people’s lives through education.
Mission Statement
Our mission is to prepare competent and committed professionals who will make positive
differences for children, young adults, and others in schools.
Guiding Image
Learning professionals committed to student success in changing
environments.
Philosophy
Faculty members in the professional education unit believe in the dignity and inherent
worth of all people and in the central role of education in a democratic society. Education is a
means of opening doors for people. Our complex and
Key dispositions for
changing society, with increasing diversity and evercandidates:
changing technology, calls for special attention to developing
educational leaders, who function effectively in formal and
informal learning environments. Such leaders gain their
Confident
authority through thoughtful and ethical actions, which
Open
include problem-posing and solving, the use of evidence in
Ethical
decision making, advocacy for all learners, and seeking
Empathic
opportunities for personal growth.
We believe inquiry calls on us to examine the best
ideas from the past, to weigh various kinds of evidence and to initiate rigorous research on
promising ideas. Innovation leads to practical applications and offers new possibilities to
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 7 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
schools and practitioners as they address the complexities of providing effective education to all
learners.
We believe effective educators (our candidates) must have strong content background,
professional competence, and dispositions to be confident, open-minded, ethical and empathic.
These dispositions are developed through programs grounded in appropriate methodologies
identified in the literature. Our philosophy calls us to hold high expectations for all candidates,
our colleagues, and ourselves; to embody active respect for our colleagues and those we serve;
and to provide the tenacious support needed for all to succeed.
As an institution, Northern Arizona University has articulated values that include the following:
excellence in education (rigorous and high quality), student success (placing learner needs at the
center of planning), educational access, diversity, integrity, and civility. The unit embraces these
values.
Core Unit Values (NAU corresponding values):
• Learner-centered education (NAU: student success). We value programs that give
candidates the greatest chance of success by including components that are experiential,
collaborative (often in mutually-beneficial partnerships with schools), problem-centered,
reflection-oriented, outcome-based, research-guided, and technology-rich. We are
committed to modeling effective learner-centered practices and dispositions.
• Commitment to Diversity (NAU: educational access; diversity). We actively promote
diversity among administration, faculty, staff and candidates. We endorse respect for
diversity in our curriculum and pedagogical applications.
• Innovation and inquiry (NAU: excellence in education). We focus on research that
serves the organizations for which we prepare professionals, and we view our mission as
incorporating new knowledge into the preparation of professionals and spreading this
knowledge to the practitioners already in the field.
• Advocacy (NAU: integrity and civility). We believe that advocacy for learners and for
equitable and effective institutions is a central responsibility.
• Life-long Learning (NAU: excellence in education). We believe in the concept of
continuous learning for personal and professional development and strive to instill that
value in our candidates.
Purpose
Our initial and advanced programs in professional education are designed to accomplish
the following purposes:
1. To prepare candidates who will effectively serve as professionals in existing
education organizations.
2. To prepare candidates who will lead education organizations in ongoing
improvement.
3. To further the development of knowledge through the synergistic relationship
between professional preparation programs and innovation and inquiry.
4. To serve education organizations through preparing personnel and providing relevant
knowledge.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 8 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
College of Education
Spring 2007 Events
Date of Event
Time
Event
March 15
March 29
12:00 & 2:00
12:00-1:00
April 5
4:00-5:00
April 12
4:30
April 13
4:00
April 14
1:00
April 16
12:00-2:00
Brown Bag on Teaching
Students’ Chat with the Dean
Regents’ Library
Meet-Me-Line 3-6629
Retirement Celebration
(Allred, Andrews, Brady, Carrasco, Hays, Willis)
Regents’ Library
(followed by University Dinner)
The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail supporting NAU’s initiative
on democracy with additional performances:
LA 135 (open to public)
The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail:
SBS110 (open to public)
The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail:
SBS110 (open to public)
PDK Event with David Berliner
Cline Library
The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail:
Cline (COE only)
There’s a Reason I’m a Teacher Conference
Opening with the play The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail
supporting NAU’s initiative on democracy with additional
performances:
April 12 – 4:30 p.m. – LA 135 (open to public)
April 13 – 4:00 p.m. – SBS110 (open to public)
April 14 – 1:00 p.m. – SBS110 (open to public)
April 16 – 4:00 p.m. – Cline – COE only
Honors Banquet (by invitation only)
First Year Faculty Breakfast with Dean
Young Authors Conference
African American Convocation
duBois Ballroom
5th Annual Student Worker Appreciation Reception
Second Floor Lounge
Honors & Scholarship Award Reception
duBois Ballroom
Promotion & Tenure Reception
(J. Foley, N. Francis, J. Martin, S. McCarthy, C. Medina)
Regents’ Library
Hispanic Convocation
duBois Ballroom
Native American Convocation
Ashurst
COE Commencement
4:00
April 17
8:00-3:30
April 19
April 20
April 21
9:00-1:30
5:00
April 26
3:00-5:00
April 28
10:00-12:00
April 30
2:00-3:00
May 10
4:00-5:00
5:00-6:00
May 12
2:00
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 9 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
4:00
Skydome
Reception
DuBois Ballroom
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 10 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes 3/13/07
Attendees (representing):
Kathleen Carpenter (Staff)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Catherine Medina (ESP)
Frances Riemer (EDL)
Sandy Stone (T&L)
Adiam Tesfay (Graduate Students)
1.
Exit Survey of Undergraduate Majors
Dr. Kathy Hildebrand provided the S.C.C.P. with an example of a possible exit survey of candidates thatwe might
use for the assessment process involving initial programs, the teacher ed programs (B.S. Ed. and M.Ed. with
Certification). Questions cover an estimation of coursework addressed, estimate to which coursework enhanced the
candidate’s abilities, and general academic satisfaction. Dr. Hildebrand analyzed how each question relates to
NCATE standards and dispositions. Ten questions can be added. The data received can be disaggregated and can
be compared to our peer institutions. No student information or emails are provided to the company. We would be
allowed to use the program that produces the data and disaggregates and compares it. Dr. Hildebrand attended the
A.A.C.T.E. meetings and spoke with several NCATE-accredited schools. They suggested that the survey has merit.
Dr. Hildebrand asked the S.C.C.P. members for their opinions in adopting this survey. The university also has an
exit survey, but it is only from randomly selected students (not every student), does not disaggregate, and does not
do a comparison. The S.C.C.P. endorsed the use of the survey and outsourcing this activity. It will begin in the
spring.
2.
Goal 5: Building Community Examples
Dr. Kain presented a list of community-building activities/events that will be occurring over the next couple months.
(Attached)
3.
Garden
A meeting with the Grounds people, Mr. Manley, Ms. Redsteer, and Dr. Kain produced an agreement that there will
be a “meter by meter” (about 40” by 40”) garden on the east side of the college. This garden is “designed to teach”
and is the usual area a teacher would receive to work with a class. Signage and communication of plans ahead of
time were requested by S.C.C.P.
4.
Accreditation Agreement by Faculty
Dr. Kain presented graphs showing faculty perspectives on pursuing accreditation over years 2002 to 2005.
S.C.C.P. asked that these be attached to the minutes. (Attached)
5.
Teaching Evaluation Form Task Force
The Chairs asked that a Teaching Evaluation Form Task Force with two representatives from each department be
formed to look at the Teaching Evaluation Form and categorize the questions as to: design, delivery (organization)
or unknown. The group will report at the Faculty Meeting on March 26. The task force met on 3/14/07 and also
discussed increasing the response rates to the evaluation and possibly revamping the questionnaire itself.
6.
Goal 4 and Addition of Hispanic
As per the request by the faculty working on the potential addition of a goal for focusing on Hispanic populations to
our C.O.E. five goals, a discussion will be delayed until their report is ready, possibly next fall.
7.
Reports from Members
Kathleen Carpenter – A staff concern was participation in graduation. The group discussed participation,
particularly faculty participation and involvement in commencement. S.C.C.P. asked that Chairs bring it to their
faculty, noting that faculty contracts include participation in commencement ceremonies, with a possible notation on
the SOEs, and that students use that time to make a connection with their faculty and their families. Specific faculty
members often were asked about by students, but those faculty were not present. Dr. Kain did note that when a
request was made for marshals for the ceremony, within a day, eleven faculty had volunteered. S.C.C.P. agreed that
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 11 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
in order to assist first through third year faculty who need regalia, the Dean’s office will provide the rental fee.
Those faculty should contact the Dean’s Office prior to renting the regalia.
Gypsy Denzine – Dr. Denzine reported that the C.O.E. State Advisory Council meeting in Phoenix had been
productive. This council combines education and business leaders who can assist our college. Additional members
are needed representing the business community. Recommendations from faculty and staff are requested by the
dean.
Frances Riemer – EDL has been doing part-time faculty training. Twelve courses for training adjuncts have been
offered, two more are being offered in March and April. EDL has completed its class scheduling and standard
syllabus and signature assignments for EDL 671 and 677. Some S.C.C.P. members requested that the signature
assignments be provided for EDF 301 and 500.
Dr. Riemer noted that she had been in a meeting in which other schools were asking how NAU had been able to
achieve its high level of effectiveness in recruiting and keeping Hispanic students. She was applauded for her
perseverance in getting the “Advanced Qualitative Data Analysis” course through curricular hurdles.
Sandra Stone – T&L voted to support the idea of a Faculty Assembly. They have a committee reviewing the
teaching evaluations and how to increase the response rate. Additionally, they are working on a policy for minimum
hours of contact with B.S. Ed. and M.A. students and faculty and a definition of “contact”. They are reworking the
content emphases into broader categories. Dr. Gallagher will speak with Dr. Markel about a possible ESL
endorsement in the content emphasis. Laura Blocher is heading the committee.
Larry Gallagher -- The ETC 447 split (into a one-credit introduction and a 2-credit follow-up) happens in the fall. It
will be piloted on campus before going statewide. The earliest it would go statewide is fall 2008.
Adiam Tesfay – EPIC is the new graduate student organization. It is sponsoring the NAMI walk in Phoenix on
March 31. Convocations are being held for the African American (April 21, 5:00, duBois), Hispanic (May 10, 4:00,
at duBois), and Native American (May 10, 5:00, Ashurst) students. All are welcome to attend these.
8.
CEFAST (C.O.E. Faculty Assembly Study Team)
Dr. Kain had met with Dr. Senese regarding the CEFAST (C.O.E. Faculty Assembly Study Team). Since S.C.C.P.
was an elected group representing various areas of C.O.E., Dr. Kain asked the S.C.C.P. about their perceptions with
regard to the Faculty Assembly and the ad hoc study group. Faculty members had questions about the assembly and
its potential role and purpose. Dr. Stone noted that the CEFAST group itself is moving forward in a positive way,
looking at the positive aspects such a group provides to other universities, and sometimes shouldering tasks that are
now on administration. Dr. Stone mentioned that Dr. Ray Gomez had volunteered to put together a mock assembly
to show how a Faculty Assembly works. A pilot for a year or two could be established and then evaluated after a
two-year period. When it was brought before the Faculty Senate, it received positive feedback. All faculty are
invited to attend the CEFAST meetings. The S.C.C.P. consensus was that they welcomed the study team to move
forward positively. In the upcoming Faculty Meeting on March 26, CEFAST will have up to one half hour (upon
request) to explain the status of their study.
9.
Technology Plan
Ms. Carpenter brought a question from staff about the results of the Technology Task Force. In 2005, a Technology
Task Force, formed from S.C.C.P. members, had made eight recommendations in their report. Most of the
recommendations have been accomplished. Re-establishment of a Technology Committee had been one of the
recommendations that had not been acted upon. It was decided by S.C.C.P. that since computers are rotated on a
scheduled basis and technology needs are met as they are requested, the need for this committee does not persist at
the present time. The Technology Assistance Group (TAG) has requested additional assistance which it will be
receiving in order to relieve the tremendous workload which they have (Task Stream, SOE/P&T project, Student
Services Database to Peoplesoft, electronic portfolios for faculty, etc.) Faculty are encouraged to use Task Stream.
Dr. Denzine will provide a flowchart of who is the best contact in TAG to assist with specific problems/projects.
10.
Podcasts/IPODS
Discussion of providing podcasts for students was positive, especially in enhancing class materials. Podcasts would
aid students with disabilities also. Ms. Tesfay noted the positive effects of these at other universities. Dr. Riemer
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 12 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
said that interviews of candidates for positions are being podcast. An idea emerged for possibly using IPODS as an
incentive to increase student response rates on course evaluations. A drawing for an IPOD upon completion of
Teaching Evaluations might be an incentive, as long as the evaluation had been submitted and the email was
disassociated with the evaluation.
11.
Chair Searches
The EDL Chair candidates are being reviewed with the potential of a couple coming on campus in the near future.
The T&L Internal Chair posting came out today.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 13 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes 4/23/07
Attendees (representing):
Kathleen Carpenter (Staff)
Tom DeStefano (EPS)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Catherine Medina (ESP)
Frances Riemer (EDL)
Sandra Stone (T&L)
Adiam Tesfay (Graduate Students)
1.
•
•
Announcements
The article, “Writing for Publication: Road to Academic Advancement” by Kenneth T.
Henson is available upon request from the Dean’s Office. It was a part of the C&I
Doctoral Seminar.
Several university administrator candidates are coming for interviews, (e.g., Social &
Behavior Sciences Dean and VP for International Initiatives). All faculty and staff are
invited to their presentations.
2.
TAG (Technology Assistance Group)
Dr. Denzine provided a chart that shows placement and duties of individuals located in the TAG
office in room 216. This chart will be included on the C.O.E. website. When asked whether
Mike Thomson should be emailed directly for changes to the website, Dr. Denzine said that he is
quite good at determining on which items to act and which to bring to her attention, so a single
email to Mr. Thomson is sufficient.
3.
Marketing Initiative
During a meeting with the Marketing department, it was determined that money tagged for
updating the website could be earmarked for brochures and other items since the C.O.E. website
was in very good shape, the best the marketing group had seen thus far around campus.
4.
Focus Groups Led by Dan Mitchell
Dan Mitchell has been leading focus groups on how to increase participation in the course
evaluation process. Preliminary findings include: send more reminders, incentives will probably
do little to increase participation, the present process is user-friendly, students welcomed the
opportunity to evaluate their classes, no matter how many. Some misconceptions were that a
person could not go directly to the URL, students don’t think that professors care, students were
afraid they would not have anonymity, students thought only the instructor reads the results
(didn’t know it went to the Chair, FSC, and Dean). The best return rates were if the professor
walked the students to the computer lab. When the students believed their professors took the
evaluation seriously, the return rate was also better. Ms. Tesfay recommended that professors
note to students when changes are made “due to course evaluations.” Midterm evaluations are
also available to each professor.
5.
Reports from Represented Areas
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 14 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Teaching & Learning (S. Stone) – Reporting from the T&L departmental meeting, various
instruments and rubrics have been developed for courses. The Multi-Age Conference on April
17 had a very good response. The search for Chair of T&L is proceeding. There were various
motions for discussion that will be acted on later.
Chairs (L. Gallagher) – Each department is working on the document for P&T /Annual Review.
NCATE is wrapping up on many items and is getting ready for next semester. Task Stream
artifacts have been launched, and more statewide programs are incorporating it. The Summer
Session enrollment is being worked on. Departmental searches are proceeding well.
Educational Specialties (C. Medina) – ESP would like more qualitative evaluation and less
quantitative. Dr. Kain noted that the department can decide how the evaluation is done,
qualitative/quantitative determinants come from the department. Having a score associated with
this determination is what will need to be reported to the Provost.
Educational Psychology (T. DeStefano) – Lori Pashnik has been hired for the School Psych
position. Students have been admitted to EPS programs for next year. The APA/doctoral
program is still being debated. C. Medina asked whether Special Ed Counseling had been
discussed. While it is not a specific area in Arizona, it is in neighboring states.
Students (A. Tesfay) – Ms. Tesfay is looking for another student to replace her on S.C.C.P. for
next year. Various convocations for students are proceeding well.
6.
Annual Report
Dr. Kain had prepared a draft annual report on goal progress for the S.C.C.P. The S.C.C.P. was
asked to review the draft and get any additions or changes to Dr. Kain via email. Some
comments on the draft included:
• A general consultant for NCATE will be coming May 3 and 4. Consultants for most
programs have already come and were quite helpful.
• Determining how best to use the TV screen in the lobby, including listing daily events,
should be addressed.
• Bringing students from each of our programs to introductory meetings might be useful to
potential students.
• Including more about the Summer Enrichment Program would be informative.
• C.O.E.’s retention rate and graduation within 6 years is also very good.
• With the focus for research being on new faculty, the need for in-university money for
tenured faculty to conduct research would be valuable even though the dollar amount
needed might be minimal.
• Is there a correlation between student retention in classes and use of VISTA or
TaskStream?
• BME 310 is a diversity-identified class.
• The newsletter focusing on our Native American initiatives will be distributed shortly.
• More opportunities for students to teach on reservations are being pursued.
• The Committee website will be added to the C.O.E. website and will provide committee
details, agendas, minutes, membership, etc., as appropriate.
• C.O.E.’s traditions should be documented.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 15 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
•
•
•
Elections for University Senate have only one person on the ballot while there are four
vacancies.
Evaluation of the dean is done every three years by the provost; Chairs are every two
years.
Regarding Annual Review criteria, departments can use the “old” criteria this year or
continue developing their revised criteria. Use of “new” criteria for promotion and tenure
will be elective until fall, 2010, depending on time in rank (as voted on in the
implementation plan, fall, 2006).
7.
Native American Initiatives
A draft of initiatives to move forward on C.O.E.’s Native American mission was presented to the
S.C.C.P. for their perusal and feedback. Dr. Kain would also like a document for rural education
to be considered.
8.
•
•
Projects Underway
The Early Childhood Center is still in process.
C.O.E. is partnering on developing a grant from Exxon based on the successful UTEACH
model out of University of Texas – Austin.
9.
S.C.C.P. Communication
Means of S.C.C.P. communicating with faculty and staff in the college were discussed. It was
suggested that S.C.C.P. be a standing agenda item in departmental staff meetings in order to
foster better communication between the S.C.C.P. and the people they represent. There is a need
for more staff and student-related issues within the S.C.C.P. Brainstorming by faculty in smaller
groups, wanting more responsibility in order to lighten the dean’s load, more voice in decisionmaking, more conversation around issues, and more information through a newsletter or emails
were ideas with regard to faculty input. There is a need for a definition of the purview of faculty
vs. non-academic decisions. The possibilities of two representatives from each department,
rather than one, staggered years and continuity were also ideas discussed. Dr. Kain asked that
further thoughts on this be sent via email to him.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 16 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes 9/13/07
Attendees (representing):
Brian Grube (Staff)
Tom DeStefano (EPS)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Jon Reyhner (ESP)
Guy Senese (EDL)
Gretchen McAllister (T&L)
Carina Curé (Undergraduate Students)
Steven Richard (Graduate Student) – will attend next meeting
1.
Introductions
Each member introduced her/himself. Steven Richard was suggested and received consent from
the S.C.C.P. as the graduate student representative. (He was notified and accepted after the
meeting.)
2.
Focus of the S.C.C.P.
The previous S.C.C.P. focus and accomplishments are recorded on the Annual Report on Goal
Progress which is available on the C.O.E. Committee Portal.
A sampling was taken at the Faculty Meeting of whether the college focus on each goal was
“about right”, “over-emphasized”, “under-emphasized”, or “no opinion”. Results had been
reported at the Faculty Meeting and results of this were given to each S.C.C.P. member. A copy
of the “Table Discussion” about goals was also given to S.C.C.P. members. Both of these were
provided as information since the members determine the focus of S.C.C.P. for this year. More
formal surveys can be taken, if requested by the S.C.C.P.
Items are often discussed at the Chairs Meeting, brought for discussion to the S.C.C.P., and then
brought to the faculty.
The Root Beer Float Social on September 11 was a success. Many students had smiles and
frothy upper lips. It is an example of our community building efforts.
3.
Updates from Constituent Groups
Members of the S.C.C.P. do not individually represent themselves; rather, it is the larger group
they are representing. At each meeting, they bring reports or issues to the S.C.C.P. from their
constituency. Their obligation is, likewise, to report to their constituency and get feedback for
the next meeting. Since this was the first meeting, several representatives did not have reports or
issues to bring to S.C.C.P. The follow representatives did report:
T&L -- Dr. McAllister brought a question of committee representation requirements (which was
to be addressed later in the meeting).
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 17 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
EPS – Dr. DeStefano noted that Educational Psychology will begin its search for a Chair very
soon. An ad hoc committee is examining their doctoral programs in light of the discussion about
seeking American Psychological Association accreditation.
Associate Dean – Dr. Denzine reported that nine faculty members have signed up for the Pilot
Annual Review Project.
The Curriculum Lab has received a grant from the United Way for early childhood materials.
These will be available to educators throughout the community, as well as our students. An
Open House is planned for the Curriculum Lab on September 26 from 5:30-7:00.
We are pursuing an opportunity with America Reads/America Counts which will provide an
opportunity for our students to be paid while being available for tutoring elementary students at
the public library.
Faculty and Staff Professional C.O.E. programs are coming up, such as the Brown Bag on Native
American Issues, Technology Workshops, our Endowed Chair Brown Bag on Faculty
Scholarship, and I.R.B. possibilities.
4.
Two Task Forces
Chairs will be working with their faculty to get the names of faculty to serve on two task forces:
Course Evaluation Question Task Force and Non-Tenure-Track Promotion Task Force.
5.
Annual Report for S.C.C.P.
The Annual Report for the S.C.C.P. is available on the C.O.E. Committee Portal. Last year’s
S.C.C.P. focused on NCATE accreditation and Promotion and Tenure issues. On the report, blue
items are indicators of committee activity. The NCATE pre-conditions document is due to
NCATE on Monday. The Executive Summary and full Conceptual Framework will also be
formally printed before then. Copies will be available for everyone.
Our grant activity has increased to over $10 million. Most grants are service, not research; but
their foci have been on rural, Native American and at-risk students, so they are aligned with our
goals. The GEAR UP grant had an above-90% graduation rate for its GEAR UP high school
students whereas the state average is about 67%.
Fifty-eight percent of our faculty participated in activities with or used the services of the Faculty
Research Center last year.
6.
Native American and Hispanic Goal/s
Last year, faculty requested that Goal 5 relating to Native Americans remain as specified. A
report was being prepared to either add Hispanics into that goal or create a separate one. No
report has been received by S.C.C.P. as of this meeting date.
7.
Models for S.C.C.P. Yearly Procedures
This year’s S.C.C.P. was asked to consider for the next meeting whether they might each
advocate for a separate goal, all focus on one or two goals, or other ideas for the S.C.C.P.
8.
N.C.A. H.L.C. (North Central Association Higher Learning Commission)
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 18 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
The N.C.A.’s Higher Learning Commission representatives will be coming to N.A.U. on October
22-24. Our university community should be familiar with the N.A.U. Strategic Goals (clings are
available in the Dean’s Office). On the N.C.A.’s previous visit, the big issue for our university
was assessment. N.C.A. will be looking at our assessment systems especially on this visit.
C.O.E.’s efforts along these lines will place it in good standing.
9.
Committees
The question has been raised as to how committee information was acquired for the Committee
Portal (https://www4.nau.edu/cee/resources/college_committees/). Each committee in the
previous few years has been asked to submit and/or modify information on a template compiling
committee information. The results are on the Committee Portal. Once the information was
assembled and published on the Committee Portal, several faculty noted that committee
membership requirements seemed inconsistent. A chart will be prepared, bringing together
committee name, charge, nomination/volunteer, term of service, process for electing. This will
be presented at the next faculty meeting, to be discussed at departmental meetings, and voted for
amendment later, if necessary.
10.
Staff Area
The idea was brought forward for an upgrade of the college’s break room. SCCP members
expressed support. A committee will be formed to provide guidance.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 19 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
S.C.C.P. Minutes 10/12/07
Attendees (representing):
Brian Grube (Staff)
Tom DeStefano (EPS)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Jon Reyhner (ESP)
Guy Senese (EDL)
1.
Dean’s Update (related to Goals)
Goal 1: Establish prominent leadership in Arizona education and human services.
Our college is working with Catherine Talakte in the Office of Native American Student
Services to develop some focus groups on the experiences of American Indians, undergraduate
and graduate, specific to C.O.E. Drs. DeStefano, Senese, Reyhner and Mr. Grube agreed to
assist with organizing the focus groups this semester.
Dr. Kain commented on the positive impact faculty are having in both leadership and
membership positions around the state.
We are partners on a Teacher Retention Study with the other universities around the state.
Goal 2: Enhance the scholarship opportunities for faculty.
For the first time in the past few years, C.O.E. has been given additional funding that can be used
for faculty and staff development and travel. This comes after quite a few years of having these
funds cut.
Goal 3: Provide leadership in the use of and systematic inquiry into distance learning and
technology integration.
University Marketing has been working with our college to develop marketing tools. We will be
targeting our marketing to our website. We discussed a potential contest to produce a 2-3 minute
video of life at our college, to be used on our website. The winner will receive a prize, (e.g., an
ipod).
Department Chairs will ask their faculty to review their web pages regularly to keep the pages
current. In T&L and E.S.P., the assistant chairs will be updating the sites.
Goal 4: Be a national leading college of education serving Native Americans.
We are working on this with the Native American Student Services office.
Goal 5: Establish a productive and supportive culture in the college.
The Staff Room will be upgraded. Departments will be completing their Annual Review criteria.
Several faculty and staff have agreed to greet our students during Family Weekend, the Sunday
Family Brunch, and Homecoming.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 20 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
2.
Member Updates
Chairs (Larry Gallagher)
Chairs are working on the accreditation (Goal 1), Annual Review criteria (Goal 5), and
supporting the new chairs.
EDL (Guy Senese)
Dr. Senese noted that he received no comments from his faculty with regard to the agenda or
issues. He shared his concern with regard to Goal 4 that it appears we have fewer Native
Americans on campus, and was wondering about the impact on our Goal 4. (There are 14 fewer
students on the Flagstaff campus (2006 – 883, 2007 – 869). An early clarification of budget
would be helpful. (Operations budgets are given to departments in the summer. These are
augmented from local funds. There will be more funds this year, as announced earlier in the
meeting.) A clarification of the Assistant Chair selection process would be appreciated.
ESP (Jon Reyhner)
Dr. Pat Peterson has several grants with underrepresented students. The 15th Annual Indigenous
Languages Conference will be held at NAU on May 2-3, 2008. Additional information and
registration is available at http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~jar/TIL.html . Dr. Reyhner indicated they
needed funds for color copies of the fliers. The dean agreed to provide these funds. Three
national speakers will highlight it. The conference proceedings will also be published.
Associate Dean (Gypsy Denzine)
The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association (N.C.A.) will be coming
October 21-24. Our college has been recognized by NAU as an exemplary professional learning
community, with our “new faculty” orientation which has strong positive evaluations; new
faculty dean’s breakfast; Brown Bags on sabbaticals (Dr. Powell’s recent one was well attended,
and Dr. Michael Blocher’s is planned for next week); the Technology Assistance Group (TAG);
the Faculty Scholarship (Mentor) Program; and e-learning. Recruitment of new faculty will be
very aggressive, with a special portion of our website devoted specifically to this. Our COE
website gets between 300 and 700 hits per day.
Dr. Senese asked about whether Masters level instructors could teach doctoral level courses,
composition of doctoral committees, how hires were made, and student involvement in meetings.
Educational Psychology (Tom DeStefano)
Dr. DeStefano reported that the Human Services portion of Educational Psychology was
concerned with the emphasis of NCATE on K-12-related areas of the university (the P.E.U.
[Professional Education Unit]), especially with the new College of Health & Human Services
being established. E.P.S. wanted assurance that they would remain with our college. Dr.
DeStefano was assured that C.O.E. will look for ways to affirm the Human Services presence in
our college.
Dr. DeStefano asked that there be a policy clarification of “adjunct” status. He is also looking
for a faculty member to accompany him on his summer trip to China. This faculty member
would do future trips with students. Dr. DeStefano is working with Dr. Pitt for Global Diversity
credit for students attending the China trips.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 21 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Staff (Brian Grube)
Mr. Grube asked for more details on the upgrade of the C.O.E. Break Room. Some staff wanted
more professional development opportunities. Some expressed a general disconnect between
faculty, staff, and the general C.O.E. community. He asked for suggestions about how to bring
the staff into more activities.
T&L (Gretchen McAllister – although Dr. McAllister was not there, she sent a report)
Dr. McAllister had received concern from her department relating to the use of clickers at the
Fall Faculty Meeting, the validity and reliability of data received, and how the data was reported.
Dr. Kain commented that this data was being used as one piece of information to inform the
S.C.C.P. in determining which goal/s to focus on this year. Its purpose was similar to the other
“Table Conversation” document the S.C.C.P. had received at the same time. He noted that
faculty can still be surveyed. Dr. DeStefano noted that, even though the data was unscientific, a
formal survey would probably show the same bimodal trend as the clicker survey did. Dr.
Senese suggested that more time was needed to talk about the goals before deciding. There was
discussion about whether conversation or anonymous surveys were better means of assessing a
group’s opinions.
Dr. McAllister’s report included a question as to whether the agenda could be posted for faculty
prior to their departmental meeting. Dr. Kain noted that each department has a different
schedule, so this would not be possible. Each S.C.C.P. agenda is sent as a draft to each S.C.C.P.
member. The S.C.C.P. members speak with their departments between S.C.C.P. meetings. They
can then add items to the S.C.C.P. agenda as they wish.
Another comment related to faculty input on Goal 4. Dr. Kain had been asked to hold discussion
of a change in Goal 4 until a report could come from some concerned faculty. Anyone can make
a motion in a faculty meeting to bring a discussion of Goal 4 to the floor of the faculty meeting.
There was concern about the appropriateness of the use of “at-risk” students in the previous
minutes. .
Dr. Senese asked about the use of use of subs for the S.C.C.P. He suggested that if a S.C.C.P.
member had two non-attendances, a new member should be selected. Dr. Kain noted that it was
the original S.C.C.P. who determined the “no sub” rule in order to have continuing
conversations, especially with the sparseness of meeting times. We will put this on the agenda
for next month.
3.
Goal Focus
Dr. Kain gave a breakdown of the “Table Conversation” lists of strengths and challenges for our
college:
Goal 1:
7 groups identified it as a strength
2 groups identified it as a challenge
Goal 2:
0 strength
2 challenge
Goal 3:
6 strength
4 challenge
Goal 4:
2 strength
2 challenge
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 22 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Goal 5:
4 strength
2 challenge
International Education:
0 strength
3 challenge
4.
Where To Focus?
S.C.C.P. will go to departmental meetings and staff will continue discussions of selecting goals
on which to focus. Target goals will be set next meeting, after discussions with constituencies.
5.
C.O.E. Initiatives
Eduventures – This is a nation-wide collaboration to engage in inquiries. Two projects are
scheduled this year: a) benchmark our college against similar schools, b) to identify effective
partnerships. We can also identify other studies we would like them to conduct.
Rodel Exemplary Teacher Initiative – This matches outstanding teachers with our beginning
teachers in the schools. They will match with two schools in the northern region. The mentor
teacher gets a $10,000 bond for working over a two year period with about 6 beginning teachers.
Each beginning teacher gets a $5,000 bond after fulfilling two years of service in schools that
serve high-poverty students.
6.
Infusion of Operating Funds
C.O.E. has been given an infusion of extra operating funds (possibly for only one year), so
faculty travel and staff development can be increased. Other ideas for use of these funds
included a partnership conference and mini-grants for scholarship. If S.C.C.P. members have
other ideas, please email Dr. Kain.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 23 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
SCCP Minutes
11/9/07
Attendees (representing):
Brian Grube (Staff)
Gypsy Denzine
Daniel Kain
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Jon Reyhner (ESP)
Guy Senese (EDL)
Gretchen McAllister (T&L)
Carina Curé (Undergraduate Students)
1.
Update
Dr. Kain updated the group on items related to the college’s goals. In leadership around the state (Goal
1), several faculty were participants and presenters at the T.E.P.C. meeting. Additionally, at the 21st
Century Schools Conference in Tucson, the AZ K-12 Center facilitated, and Dr. Denzine presented. The
dean’s office and departments supplied reimbursement for participating C.O.E. faculty.
In the research area (Goal 2), there is more money for mailings and surveys. A committee is working on
a clear process for determining the use of this money, (e.g., mini-grants for mailings and surveys, student
travel, technology issues, APEL, recruitment, staff development, etc.)
In technology (Goal 3), the viability of purchasing XO computers during the November 12 window for
our college and third world schools was discussed. It was unclear whether some reservation schools
could be recipients because of their lack of computers in some schools. The website for further
information is: laptopgiving.org
Native American undergraduate and graduate focus groups (Goal 4) will be formed, with the aid of the
Native American Student Services. Since the IRB process needs to be fulfilled, these focus groups will
be held in Spring 2008. These focus groups will help evaluate our programs, areas of support needed,
implications for field work and diversity issues.
For community building (Goal 5), we will have the Holiday Party on December 3, a good time for people
to intact. There will also be a remodel of the Break Room, with Janet Savery leading the committee. For
staff, Mr. Grube will be chairing a committee to develop criteria for reviewing staff proposals for
professional development. Student travel money may also be available.
Dr. Reyhner, representing ESP, spoke about the Indigenous Language Conference (Goal 4) which will be
occurring on May 2-3, 2008 at the new conference center. Fliers that were paid for by the Dean’s Office
were taken to the recent N.I.E.A. Conference. BME 593 and BME 570 courses will be continuations of
this conference throughout the Summer Session 2008.
Ms. Curé, representing the students, said that students were unclear on the reasons for seeking NCATE
accreditation and the implications in receiving this. Task Stream was also a concern because students did
not know the advantages for themselves. Ideas to facilitate student understanding included a 1-page flier
to explain NCATE, Task Stream and give tips concerning Task Stream’s relevance, how to use it, etc.
During an induction meeting, it could be mentioned that it helps candidates meeting standards and that the
data collection helps make programs better. Dr. Gallagher gave examples of how data has already been
used.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 24 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Dr. McAllister, representing T&L, reported from the Teaching and Learning departmental meeting that
there were several issues with the mid-term evaluations, especially as they related to climate and morale;
perceptions of the S.C.C.P; and use of data. The S.C.C.P. agreed we need to revisit the mid-semester
course evaluations. Dr. Denzine will take this issue to the Course Evaluation Task Force which is open to
all faculty members. Dr. Gallagher commented that data is just starting to come in, and that it has been
useful in determining program options. Dr. Kain commented on decisions made by the S.C.C.P. to
benefit faculty, (e.g., determination of use of the new operations budget money).
Mr. Grube, representing the staff, reported that the staff meeting yesterday had formed a committee to
determine the best means of assigning the funds from the operations budget and combining it with Human
Resources’ money. The committee will be working with Dr. Kain on this.
Dr. Gallagher, representing the Chairs, reported that ESP was working on course approvals for Distance
Learning, course scheduling and criteria for performance review, annual and retention review. Relating
to the goals, they are focusing on whether our curriculum is tied to them, how we do on diversity, and
how can we better work with the Native American community. With regard to Distance Learning, Chairs
are meeting with them on a monthly basis to promote better understanding.
Dr. Denzine highlighted the proposed on-line writing tutorial center staffed by English majors which may
be functioning this fall. It will be an enhancement for our students and could simulate the writing section
of the AEPA exam for teacher and administrative certificates. Its services could also be viewed as
matching for grants.
Dr. Senese, representing EDL, said that their meeting had been cancelled. He wanted to reiterate about
the pilot faculty assembly group and feedback on mid-term evaluations for new faculty and its impact.
Dr. Kain commented that a task force has been asked to look at the course evaluations. Dr. Senese called
for more mentoring of faculty. He highlighted the Indian Education Conference in May as bringing
national recognition to N.A.U. and open to everyone. Various Native American nations are willing to
work with us, and they want matching funds. Dr. Gilbert was also recognized as the new President of the
National Indian Education Association.
2.
Revision Processes of C.O.E. Goals
The original C.O.E. goals were proposed, discussed, taken to departmental meetings, and voted on by
faculty and staff as goals for the 2004-09 period. The process for revising/ replacing/ keeping will begin.
Members indicated they wished to discuss this in their departments.
3.
Dispositions
The dispositions for the initial programs are being discussed by the departments. Chairs have asked for
feedback by December. The feedback will be consolidated by the Chair.
4.
Native American Conference
The committee discussed establishing a conference on Native education. Drs. Senese and Reyhner agreed
to take the lead in proposing a conference via a business plan.
5.
Future Agenda Items
None were suggested.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 25 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
SCCP Meeting Minutes
January 25, 2008
Attendees:
Brian Grube (Staff)
Daniel Kain
Gypsy Denzine
Larry Gallagher (Chairs)
Guy Senese (EDL)
Gretchen McAllister (T&L)
Tom DeStefano (EPS)
Penny Medina
1. Update
a. Budget Information
There could be up to a $16M cut from the University’s budget.
Officially, nothing has been decided. However, most of COE’s budget is
tied up in salaries. During this year’s COE Leadership Retreat, a
budget review will work through the rough spots. Budget cuts for the
2008 fiscal year may extend to the 2009 fiscal year.
b. Plan for distribution of additional research operations Dollars.
Dr. Kain distributed a draft of principles for the “Dean’s Research
Grant Program” for the spring semester. Funding will be for the 2008
fiscal year with expenditures of research funds by June 30, 2008, with
current budgetary uncertainties, Dr. Kain is optimistic about locating
additional funding to offer the program again. Allowing the flexibility
needed for faculty to have continual research funding for an additional
year. Suggestions given to revise the draft included clarifying the
specified time requirements for expenditure of funds.
c. Follow up on agenda items of previous meeting – November 11
i. Substitute Representatives
Dr. Senese had requested to revisit the discussion of “no
substitutes” and to consider a limited substitute attendance.
Substitutes could act as a proxy to take notes and to disseminate
information/ issues back to the departments. Committee agreed
upon the substitute for no more than two missed meetings. If more
substitutions are needed, the representative needs to reevaluate
his/her commitment.
ii. Native American Education Conference – Summer 2009
Drs. Senese and Reyhner presented the idea of the conference in
support of our goals. We discussed starting small – using COE
classrooms, low cost catering, etc. Then lobby for additional
funding and participation from other sources. Suggestions for
the conference were:
a. the Business College as a venue with the advantage of it
being free and excellent networking
b. asking for participation from the Applied Indigenous
Studies Department
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 26 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
c. having the bookstore sell books to promote the theme or
faculty books
d. have the proceedings from the conference published
The members suggested the formation of a working committee from
the college to work on a theme and to brainstorm additional
ideas.
2.
Strategic Plan Update process:
discussion and recommendation
The College has a strategic plan in place; the SCCP urged we review the
design process for COE. After some discussion, it was agreed upon that a
focus group comprising of faculty and staff be established to look into
developing a reasonable process, reflecting on the present goals as a guide.
Identifying external stakeholders and having them evaluate our programs/goals
for feedback. We would like to initiate a clear process to develop COE’s
goals before the next strategic planning session.
Processing Summary:
Compile data of accomplishments from present goals
Followed by needs assessment (SWOT)
Training of faculty/staff from an outside facilitator
Have each department do follow up discussions and assessments
External scan by Fall semester
Articulate process towards formulating our goals by Spring Semester
Drs. McAllister and Senese agreed to present the draft process at the next
faculty meeting.
3.
Setting additional faculty meetings to discuss faculty assembly
Is there still an interest in establishing a “Faculty Assembly” component?
Yes
Should COE establish a pilot component to see how it would work with in our
college? There are numerous ideas to be brainstormed:
- Involvement by both faculty and staff
- Do people get appointed or elected to the assembly?
- Possibility of a different name such as “College Assembly
- Committees within the assembly component: program committee,
personnel committee, executive committee
Tom DeStefano and Guy Senese will work on details to bring forward a plan for
discussing a pilot component.
4.
5.
Issues from members – deferred until next meeting
Next meeting’s date, time, and agenda items
a. Please forward suggested dates of availability for next meeting and
any agenda items. It was suggested to place TaskStream and educating
the student on the process” on the next meeting’s agenda.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 27 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
SCCP Meeting
September 24, 2008
Attendees: Catherine Medina, Larry Gallagher, Candy Holloway, Kay Quillen, Gypsy Denzine,
Gretchen McAllister, Guy Senese, Dan Kain, and Penny Medina
Agenda Items:
Introductions
Role, purpose, and operations of SCCP
Soliciting student member names
Discussion of the next steps in revising the strategic plan
Agenda for next meeting
Introductions:
Dan asked everyone to introduce themselves and to mention the group they were
representing.
Role, purpose, and operations:
Dan gave a brief review of the Faculty Assembly Formation Council (FAFC) pilot
Executive Council, and SCCP goals, objectives and responsibilities for the academic year.
SCCP’s objectives are to sheppard the goals of the college and develop a draft of the revised
strategic goals for the college to consider and vote on for next semester.
Soliciting student members (names):
Dan asked the membership for ideas for soliciting students that would like to participate
in SCCP for the 2008-09 academic year. Several suggestions were: graduate students, Lissa
Watts, or Maria Montenegro, and possibly the ASNAU Senator.
Discussion for next steps in revising strategic plan
SCCP – Standing Council on College Priorities meets once a month on Wednesdays, 3-4:30
p.m. Membership includes a faculty representative from each of the COE departments, a
representative from the Leadership Team, two at large staff members, two students
(undergraduate and graduate), the Associate Dean, and the Dean. This year’s focus will be to
develop new college strategic goals for the next five years. The goals will be presented to the
college for vote by the spring semester. General business is completed by consensus vote. It
was agreed upon by last year’s committee that it is acceptable to arrange for a substitute if the
member is unable to attend the meeting. The objectives of SCCP are to shepherd the college
goals, advise the dean in managing the resources for the college in support of the goals, and if
goals are being neglected, how to address the problem. The membership asked if the meeting
time be changed from 3-4:30 p.m. to 2:30–4 p.m. The membership agreed to the change starting
the next meeting on October 22, 2008. The SCCP meetings for the fall semester are on October
22, November 19, and December 10.
Discussion of next steps in revising the strategic plan:
Dan distributed a chart indicting the deadlines and process for the revision of the goals
for COE, and he indicated that the members should review a survey handout that was completed
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 28 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
by SCCP last year and COE goal suggestions from the fall faculty meeting. Both documents are
linked to the SCCP’s committee portal on the COE’s website. The fall follow-up for SCCP is to
draft goals by December, get feedback during the spring semester and have the final goals
drafted and to address gaps in the goals by May. Membership needs to read all the material
handed out before the start of the next meeting. By the October 22’s meeting, please come with
recommendations as to keeping the goals we currently have, revise the current goals, establish
new goals, or eliminate the current goals and start over.
Agenda for next meeting:
Recommendations for next meeting’s agenda items: Division of labor for members,
establish objectives with faculty, focus on measurable indicators for progress, timeline needed
for revision of goals (goals need to be drafted prior to the November meeting), to hear from
teams on accreditation process, and developing a reflective process and overview for the goals.
Larry will present SCCP’s progress at the Leadership Team’s meeting on October 8, 2008.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 29 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
SCCP Minutes
October 22, 2008
Attendees: John McClure, Dan Kain, Gypsy Denzine, Catherine Medina, Kay Quillen,
Gretchen McAllister
Absent: Larry Gallagher, Guy Senese, (2 student members not named yet)
Agenda:
Approving minutes
SAC PEST
Observations/issues from reading surveys and goal rpt.
Division of labor for drafting goals
1. Minutes: Changes to the minutes submitted by Gypsy Denzine. It was moved, seconded and
approved for approval of the minutes for September 24, 2008
2. SAC PEST: Dan distributed the State Advisory Council’s PEST for the SCCP members to
read before continuing the discussion on revising the goals.
3. Observations/issues from reading surveys and goal report: Members commented on
being politically active. We need to be cautious as what direction we support because political
environments are always changing and can have negative implications. As an institution we
can’t legally support political campaigns.
Budget cuts will have an impact on the college, and our goal is to cut as far away from the
classroom as possible. However, the college will have to review areas that will have impact on
class availability. It’s the little efficiencies that make biggest impact.
GOAL 1. Establish prominent leadership in Arizona education and human services.
The committee members discussed the first goal’s assessment when completed was difficult to
measure. “How do we know when we done it”? “Establish leadership – what does that mean”?
SCCP members were interested in improving the criteria under each of our goals. Faculty would
like to maintain the goal but make it clearer.
GOAL 2. Enhance the scholarship opportunities for faculty.
SSCP members shared some faculty opinions that the college needed to enhance the scholar activity of
faculty by minimizing the barriers in the process to apply for grants. Faculty feel that the process is too
much work for the amount of money given to them for research. Some faculty feel that only a few people
apply for research/travel grants because of the “gate keeping across the university”. They thought that the
process for the Provost Travel grant should be reconsidered. It was suggested that the college consider
having a sub-goals to simplify travel fund processes and to put money aside to support SPA
organizations.
GOAL 3. Provide leadership in the use of and systematic inquiry into distance learning and
technology integration.
Discussion centered on why the university does not integrate systems such as Peoplesoft. The college
needs to streamline technology to be efficient, and be aware of the management of technology vs. the
implementation of technology. The group wanted to increase the goal’s support and to increase
technology support with distance education initiatives.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 30 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
Discussion also centered on training objectives with technology such as SKYPE and obtaining
Taskstream training for secondary education students. Secondary educations students are not required to
take a pre-class that train the students for setting-up their accounts in Taskstream.
GOAL 4. Be a national leading college of education serving Native Americans
Discussion entailed expanding the goal to include Hispanic/Latina/o students.
GOAL 5. Establish a productive and supportive culture in the college.
The group discussed maintaining the goal but to extend the goal to encompass the push for globalization,
or to include Hispanics/Latina/o students. Perhaps consider a new goal is the area of globalization.
New Goal: Premier Early Childhood institution as a sub-goal under Goal1and invested with
resources.
Division of labor for drafting goals:
SCCP members chose goals to work on phrasing for the next meeting. The members are to
consider establishing focused goals which give the college direction especially in tough budget
times and to align the college with resources within the university. For the next meeting,
members are to have drafted goal statements that are only to be at a level of goal phrasing with
key objectives. The goals and objectives are to have a connection to the NAU strategic plan, and
the PEU conceptual framework. Dan will place a template for members to work with in the COE
portal. The goal’s template is due via email to Dan by November 12, 2008.
Assignments are:
1. Leadership - John
2. Scholarship - Larry
3. Technology - Kay
4. Native American/Hispanic – Guy
5. Hispanic/Latino - Catherine
6. Globalization - Gretchen
7. Early childhood - Gretchen
8. Climate – Catherine
Agenda Items for meeting on November 19, 2008:
1. Template Review – connection to the university strategic plan and the conceptual
framework.
2. Suggested changes
3. Combine and simplify
4. Help shepherd current goals, considering budget cuts in relationship to our goals
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 31 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
SCCP Meeting Minutes
November 19, 2008
Attendees: John McClure, Gypsy Denzine, Catherine Medina, Gretchen McAllister, Dan Kain,
Larry Gallagher, Kay Quillen, Candy Holloway, Meagan Fredrick, ASNAU student
representative
Absent: Guy Senese
Agenda:
Minutes: approved
Goals
Budget
Minutes: The committee approved the minutes for October 22, 2008.
Goals:
The SCCP members were asked to draft goal phrasing using a template to help with the
phrasing of the goals and drafting objectives for each goal.
Goal 1. Establish prominent leadership in Arizona education and human services.
The group felt the goal was fundamental to the college and should continue to be one of
our goals, maybe a change in wording. However, the objectives should change to support future
directives with the university and state. Need to take into consideration the
measurement/assessment quality of goal. Instead of the use of “establish” in the goal, replace
with the word “maintaining” or “demonstrate”.
Goal 2. Enhance Scholarship opportunities for faculty.
Suggestions by the group was to identify research as an objective and to have an
interdisciplinary approach, to identify areas of high priority for research, faculty development for
junior faculty and non-tenure tack personnel. The group asked if there was a way to include staff
members in the goal and objectives. It was also suggested to attach a glossary of terms to the
document. As an example the word “research” and what is the meaning.
Goal 3. Provide leadership in the use of and systematic inquiry into distance learning and
technology integration.
Discussion centered on how to integrate technology into the classroom, the objectives of
the portal, increasing of student communication about technology, and how to become more
connected to faculty located at statewide sites through technology. Suggestions by the group
included assistance in learning of technology, an objective to implement adequate preparation for
students in technology, management of technology with increased faculty/student use as a
learning and management tool within the college, creating an environment to improve a
teaching/learning environment in technology, and consider rephrasing the goal. Kay and
Candy agreed to work with Gypsy on a revision.
Goal 4. Be national leading college of education serving Native Americans.
Group discussion focused on whether we should retain goal 4 to reflect the university’s
goals or to revise to include the Hispanic/Latina/o populations. We considered a draft of an
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 32 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
additional goal on the Hispanic population. We could target the Hispanic/Latina/o populations at
the college level under an umbrella of diversity. If we decide to adopt the objectives could
reflect goal 4. Managing every diversity could be a problem. The group needs to consider
restrategizing the goal.
Goal 5. Establish a productive and supportive culture in the college.
The group discussed including civility within the objectives. Also, to include a culture of
inclusion the contributes to a rich learning environment. Goal needs to be rephrased to have a
different meaning.
New Goal: Increase globalization in College of Education.
The group discussed four strategies for the new goal: increase recruitment of
international student populations, best way to increase our global reach, including Teacher Prep
programs and exchange summer enrichment programs and consider increasing international
graduate programs.
Next Meeting – December 10, 2008
Goals for next meeting on Wednesday, December 10, 2008: Each member needs to
revise to match the template, review, and construct ideas. Review these carefully for details and
come prepared to revise each goal.
Budget:
Draft of Budget Reduction principles:
Dan introduced the draft for Budget Reduction Principles to the SCCP. The member had
no changes to the document.
Draft ideas for budget reduction:
Dan introduced the draft for budget reductions stating that it is only a draft and no
decisions have been made. The decisions will be made by the Provost. Dan will be presenting
the ideas for budget reductions to faculty and staff next week for discussion. The draft listed ten
areas for considered budget reductions:
1. Vacant Faculty and Staff lines
2. Reorganization of the college
3. Release time
4. Low-Enrolled Courses
5. Course-section capacity and course design
6. Workloads
7. Graduate Programs
8. Sabbaticals
9. Curricular Efficiency
10. Center and Institutes
SCCP members did not recommend any changes to the proposal.
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 33 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c
College of Education, Standing Council on College Priorities (SCCP)
We develop educational leaders who create tomorrow’s opportunities.
Page 34 of 34
Exhbit 6.3.c