Standard 5

Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development 

5a. Qualified Faculty

Qualifications of professional education faculty.  The Unit consists of 125 professional education faculty members for the 2006-2007 academic year.  Of the 108 full-time faculty members, 77.8% hold earned doctorates in their field of expertise, 20 (18.5%) are full professors, 31 (28.7%) are associate professors, 33 (30.5%) are assistant professors, and 24 (22.2%) are instructors (Table 1).  A small percentage of faculty members are part-time (11.2%) or adjunct instructors (2.4%) who hold an advanced degree in their discipline and have relevant experience, qualifying them as experts in the field.  A detailed Faculty Qualifications Matrix (Exhibit 5a.1) has been compiled, identifying the qualifications and assignments of faculty members in the Unit.  The depth and breadth of faculty members’ educational experiences, as well as scholarship and leadership contributions, are also evident in faculty vita located in General Documents on the NCATE webpage.

Expertise of qualifying faculty without terminal degrees for assignments.  Faculty qualifications are appropriate for the courses and clinical experiences provided by individual faculty members. See Exhibit 5a.2 for information about University supervisor certifications. Also, the Faculty Qualifications Matrix identifies the qualifications and assignments.

School faculty members are licensed in areas they teach or supervise.  All school supervisors and mentors are certified or licensed in their areas of specialty as illustrated in Exhibits 5a.3, 5a.4, 5a 5.  In 2006-2007, 100% percent of partner school faculty members were licensed in the areas they taught or supervised (Teach Louisiana).  Also in 2006-2007, school faculty completed an annual survey that was examined for evidence of competence in their fields.  Of the supervising teachers who completed the survey (n=141), 55% reported at least a master’s degree, 94% reported completion of LATAAP assessor and/or mentor training, and 16% reported National Board Certification.  Data provide evidence that school faculty are master teachers and/or are recognized for competence in their fields.

Contemporary professional experiences in school settings for higher education clinical faculty.  Faculty members have contemporary experience in a variety of school districts, grades, schools, and settings.  Such experiences add richness to their classroom instruction and clinical supervision.  The Faculty Qualifications Matrix clearly demonstrates that Unit faculty are not only academically qualified but are also qualified by experience in their areas of expertise. 

5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching

Instruction reflects the CF, current research, and developments in the fields.  Faculty members have a thorough understanding of the content they teach and base their instruction on the Unit’s CF as well as research, theories, and current developments in their fields and teaching.  They exhibit intellectual vitality in their sensitivity to critical issues, focusing, for example, on the changing family, technology in educational settings, implications of high stakes testing, and diversity.  Syllabi include a summary of the CF, and syllabi are developed and revised to reflect developments in appropriate fields.  Faculty members correlate course objectives to the four components of the CF and discuss the framework with candidates (Generic syllabi).

Encouragement of reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions.  Faculty members encourage candidate development of reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions through a variety of methods.  Faculty assess candidates’ dispositions using the Professional Attributes Scale. Case studies are commonly used to develop critical thinking skills and problem solving. During field experiences, candidates are required to reflect on what they learn from observation and teaching. Reflections are reviewed by faculty and returned to candidates with feedback. Additionally, candidate portfolios require reflection on individual artifacts and on the completed portfolio (E-Folio rubric). Faculty use action research in some programs. The ELT program requires that all graduates develop and implement an Action Research Project focused on  educational decision-making. Projects may be found in the electronic student portfolios (http://pangea.tec.selu.edu). 

Instructional strategies and assessments.  Faculty strive to be teacher scholars who have in-depth knowledge of their fields and integrate current knowledge about their content fields, teaching, and learning in their own instructional practice (Syllabi).  In doing so, faculty use a variety of instructional strategies that reflect an understanding of candidate diversity (Exhibit 5b.1).  Additionally, Unit faculty understand assessment and evaluation, use multiple forms of assessment (including performance assessment), and model these practices in their classes (Exhibit 5b.2; Syllabi).  For example, in evaluating lesson plans, faculty members use a rubric that gives candidates a clear understanding of what is expected (Lesson Plan rubric).  Individual faculty members create assignments that require candidates to plan for and implement differentiated instruction, and employ rubrics for assessing these assignments (Exhibit 5b.3). 

Instruction reflects knowledge and experiences in diversity.  Faculty infuse aspects of diversity throughout course work, FXs, and clinical practica.  Candidates in initial programs are required to take EDUC 211: Diversity in the Classroom at the undergraduate level, and advanced Curriculum and Instruction candidates take EDUC 660: Dimensions of Diversity for Education.  Candidates are placed in diverse settings at a variety of grade levels, providing them with opportunities for planning and implementing instruction and assessing students in diverse public school settings. In EDUC 677: Foundations of Early Literacy, advanced candidates collaborate on a project that addresses linguistically and culturally responsive teaching. Exhibit 4b.3 provides evidence of expertise and interest of faculty often used in instruction.

Use of technology.  Faculty infuse technology throughout their instruction and require candidates to utilize technology in their learning experiences and practice with PK-12 students (e.g., Internet, Blackboard, digital cameras, Power Point, and video recording equipment (Exhibit 5b.4; Syllabi).  Drs. Yates and Anzelmo-Skelton combined sections of MAT 631/636 and SPED 663 for a presentation on “Assistive Technology for Learning” with activities centered on low-tech printed communication boards and Intellikeys alternative keyboards.

Candidate opinions. Faculty members are evaluated by candidates in their courses each semester.  They consistently receive ratings at or above University averages on Student Opinion of Teaching Surveys (SOTs) (Exhibit 5b.5).  Additionally, graduating teacher education candidates evaluate faculty on the Exit Survey.  Candidates consistently report that they are “Satisfied” or “Very Satisfied” with the effectiveness of faculty as teachers, quality of instruction, opportunities for meaningful interaction with faculty in scholarly activity, and inclusion of “real-world” experiences and examples (Exhibit 5b.6). At the end of student teaching, candidates evaluate university and school supervisors and overwhelmingly affirm the quality of the student teaching experience (Exhibits 5b.7, 5b.8, 5b.9 and 5b.10).

Self-assessment of teaching.  Faculty evaluate their use of best practices by completing the Faculty Self-Assessment: Modeling Best Practices Survey annually (Exhibit 5b.11).  In 2006-2007, 97% of faculty within the COEHD and 77-79% in partner colleges indicated that they “frequently” or “always” model best practices for integrating current knowledge of the content field in their instructional practice, and that they encourage candidates’ development of reflection, critical thinking and problem-solving.  Faculty members assess their own effectiveness as teachers and use available data to improve their practice. Faculty also reflect on the effect they have on candidate learning and performance through the annual faculty review process, in conferences with department heads, and through the third-year and six-year reviews for tenure and promotion. In 2006-2007, 82% of COEHD faculty and 56% of partner college faculty reported that candidates and peers frequently recognized them as outstanding teachers across campus. In 2006-2007, Dr. Naquin (Kinesiology) received the Southeastern President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching and Dr. Fulwiler received the Louisiana Technology Council “Technology Educator of the Year” award. 

5c. Modeling Best Practices in Scholarship

Scholarly work expected as part of institution’s mission.  Unit faculty engage in scholarly work in their fields of specialization. This work is based on the Unit’s CF and the mission of the University. Faculty publications include handbooks that are used to introduce preservice teachers to teaching strategies, address standards and benchmarks, incorporate the former into learning activities, and assess student learning (Dr. Lester and Instructor Ainsworth). Faculty have published articles in refereed journals on the effects of dyslexia and dyscalculia (Dr. Wadlington), action research (Dr. Elliott), teacher induction (Dr. Carr), and teacher collaboration in inclusive classrooms (Dr. Hines). Faculty have written grants which directly impact candidates and mentors (Wallace Grant, Drs. Slaton and Harchar). Faculty have also written grants and made presentations on the uses of educational technology (Drs. Adams and Fulwiler). Exhibit 4b.3 provides examples of scholarly work by faculty in the area of diversity.

Types of scholarship activities.  Publications and presentations are two means of exhibiting scholarly work. Scholarship is also demonstrated through grant proposals, action research, and work as leaders and consultants with school systems and the greater community. Exhibit 5c.1 provides a chart showing the number of faculty engaged in different scholarly activities during 2006-2007. Also, see Exhibit 5c.2 for a chart summarizing the activities of faculty in the areas of publications, presentations, and grants over a three-year period. Examples of faculty members’ professional work can be found in the NCATE Exhibit Room.

Faculty are actively engaged in inquiry that ranges from knowledge generation to exploration and questioning of the field to evaluating the effectiveness of a teaching approach.  Faculty have been actively involved in evaluating the effectiveness of schools and school systems and have provided recommendations for improving student achievement (Dr. Kirylo). An evaluation of service-learning programs with Louisiana Learn and Serve impacts student learning because the project indentifies features of effective service-learning programs at K-12 levels (Dr. Elliott). Research projects conducted by faculty also involve studies in school settings with children and teachers. Dr. Carr has conducted research on mentoring and teacher leadership based on her work with the Teacher Scholars Program (Vita).  Faculty summarize their achievements in scholarship on their vitae and in their end-of-the-year reports as part of the faculty evaluation process. (Faculty reports and evaluations are available in offices of department heads.) 

5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service

Service expected as part of institution’s and unit’s mission.  Professional education faculty are expected to provide service to the College and University, to P-12 schools, and to the broader regional, state, national, and global communities in ways that are consistent with Southeastern’s mission (Vision 2010, COEHD Mission Statement).  The importance of service is evident in the University Tenure and Promotion Guidelines as well as in guidelines put forth by the COEHD and individual departments. In the COEHD, faculty service is worth at least 10% of the 100 points awarded on the annual faculty performance evaluation.  See policy and procedures located in each departmental office, and the COEHD Faculty Handbook.

Engagement in service activities.  Unit faculty provide exemplary service to the College, University, PK-12 schools, and the community. They serve on University Committees; Unit, departmental, and program committees; and volunteer for various activities. (Exhibits 5d.1 and 5d.2) In T&L, all faculty participate in (1) monthly faculty meetings and (2) meetings in one of the five program areas: Early Childhood, Foundations, Literacy and Language, Methods and Assessment, and Special Education. Minutes are recorded for each meeting and can be obtained from the departmental secretary (Ms. Sharp). The Curriculum Advisory Committee makes decisions regarding the curriculum. The Council for Teacher Education is appointed by the Dean to formulate policies. Minutes for the COEHD Curriculum Committee, Council for Teacher Education, and Dean’s Administrative Council can be found in General Documents on the NCATE webpage. Ad hoc committees also play an important role (e.g., faculty search, peer review). For example, in 2006-2007 faculty members revised the COEHD tenure and promotion guidelines and revised the Master of Arts in Teaching Program. Faculty from Special Education collaborated in the redesign of their graduate program, approved in 2006. Annually, faculty participate in a number of community events such as Relay for Life, United Way, and Rock 'n Roar (a community event providing interactive displays for campus visitors).

Unit faculty also collaborate with teachers in P-12 schools on instructional and professional development topics, projects, mentoring programs, publications, presentations, grant writing, program redesign, and service activities (Exhibits 5d.3 and 5d.4). Dr. Carr collaborated with mentor teachers in St. Tammany, Tangipahoa, and Livingston Parishes to present a session on differentiated instruction at the Louisiana Super Conference on Special Education (Vita). Dr. Beard collaborated with faculty in the Hammond Magnet School to assist in screening over 200 applicants. Additionally, faculty write grants and collaborate with faculty and staff in P-12 schools. A $1.2 million federal grant, “Project Teach,” provided funds for a five-year program to increase the number of teachers qualified to work with students who speak limited English. Project Impact continued the work when Southeastern received $598,000 to train Jefferson Parish teachers and staff who work with children who speak limited English. Through the Jumpstart program, college students prepare preschool students for school success. Dr. Thornhill secured a Board of Regents Grant for “Literacy and Learning” to integrate literacy across the middle school curriculum. The Louisiana and Traditional American History Grant, funded for $999,999, supports the work of colleagues in History/Social Studies with area high school teachers. Exhibit 5d.5 provides additional examples of collaboration activities.

Faculty also provide leadership by serving on professional executive boards, advisory boards, and committees. Individual faculty members serve on the Publications Committee, Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI); the Editorial Board for Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy); and the Manuscript Review Committee for Focus on Teacher Education. Faculty members hold numerous leadership positions (NCATE, Board of Examiner Member; Louisiana Board of Examiners Board of Directors; Regina Coeli Child Development Center Member; Editorial Advisory Board, The Reading Professor; Member-at-Large, Southwest Educational Research Association; Editor, AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice..

Additionally, faculty sponsor student professional associations. In T&L, faculty sponsors include: Dr. Van derJagt and Ms. Davis, Student Council for Exceptional Children; and Dr. Sadden and Mr. Simoneaux, Southeastern Education Association for Students. Faculty in partner colleges sponsor language clubs and work with students to organize cultural activities (Dr. Marshall, French Club; Ms. Sanchez, Spanish Club). Students in Sigma Tau Delta have made presentations at conferences (Faculty advisor, Dr. Dorrill). Unit faculty supervise candidates participating in service learning and/or work in PK-12 schools as part of field experiences. In EDUC 415, Dr. Edwards’ students complete oral histories of community members (Exhibit 5d.6). Dr. Hines supervises candidates in SPED 361 who provide individual tutoring for students with disabilities (Exhibit 5d.7). Annually, the special education program provides undergraduate teacher candidates an opportunity for diverse field experiences through the Summer Enhancement Program (SPED 441and 465 syllabi). 

5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance

Faculty evaluation.  The University of Louisiana system requires that universities under its jurisdiction, which includes Southeastern Louisiana University, evaluate each faculty member on an annual basis and file the evaluation in appropriate personnel files (Rules, Chapter III, Section X, 1993). Southeastern has a comprehensive faculty evaluation system that includes regular and comprehensive reviews of teaching, scholarship, and service. Recently, the Tenure and Promotion Guidelines were revised by an ad-hoc committee of faculty members representing different levels of rank and various departments and colleges in the University. Revised guidelines were adopted and faculty members in individual departments and programs aligned departmental tenure and promotion guidelines with the new University guidelines. Additionally, members of the ad-hoc committee revised the guidelines for annual faculty evaluation.

Faculty performance on unit evaluations. The end-of-year evaluation conducted annually  addresses the areas of teaching, research, and service, including collaboration with the professional community and leadership in the institution and the profession. For example, see the end-of-year review procedures for ELT (Exhibit 5e.1) and T&L (Exhibit 5e.2). Observations of non-tenured faculty are performed by each department head once a semester. Completed reviews of faculty performance for 2006-2007 can be found in the offices of the department heads. See Exhibit 5e.3 for a chart summarizing how well faculty members performed on annual evaluations in 2006-2007. For University clinical faculty, individual evaluations are completed at the end of the Fall and Spring semesters by Dr. Day, Director of Student Teaching. (Exhibits 5e.4 and 5e.5)

Use of faculty evaluations to improve teaching, scholarship, and service.  Annual faculty reviews serve several purposes including decisions about merit, as a component of the promotion and tenure decision process, and as an indicator of needed faculty development. The guidelines for the annual review conform to the tenure and promotion guidelines established by each department and are in alignment with the policies of the University as stated in the Faculty Handbook and reflect our CF. Feedback from these evaluations is used by faculty members to improve their teaching, scholarship, and service. Evaluations guide and accelerate professional scholarship, teaching, service, collaboration, and the implementation of the functions of an Effective Professional as described in our CF. Lastly, all evaluations are part of the end-of-year conference and guide the development of annual plans for each faculty member. Department heads and administrators examine outcomes of faculty evaluations annually. This information is used in decisions regarding course assignments and teaching loads, the allocation of funds for professional development, committee assignment, and other activities.

In addition to the annual review, peers and administrators evaluate faculty at the time of promotion and tenure to associate professor and promotion to the rank of professor. Both of these processes involve assessment of curriculum vitae, annual faculty evaluation summaries, summary of activities for each year, course syllabi, examinations, grade distributions and “Student Opinion of Teaching” results. This survey instrument (SOT) is administered to all classes taught in the University. The documentation for tenure and promotion review is a portfolio of the above listed documents and examples can be found in the respective offices of Drs. Anzelmo-Skelton, Edwards, and Elliott.

Furthermore, faculty self-assess to improve their teaching and impact on candidate performance. They use information from Student Teacher Exit Surveys, SOTs, and candidate performance on exams and in field experiences to judge their own effectiveness and make changes. They self-assess when they prepare their end-of-year reports for department heads and portfolios for promotion and tenure. In addition, many faculty members have created personalized surveys they administer to students in their classes to judge their own effectiveness.

5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

Professional development related to faculty evaluations. Consistent with Vision 2010 and the COEHD Strategic Plan, professional development is supported by the University and Unit. The Center for Faculty Excellence (CFE) is the campus-wide unit created to assist faculty by providing opportunities for personal and professional growth, for innovation and experimentation, and for change and renewal. The Center accomplishes this by a) sponsoring workshops, infosessions, discussions, and satellite presentations on a variety of topics in the areas of teaching and learning and b) providing funding opportunities in teaching and research to assist faculty in addressing differing needs as teachers and scholars. In May of 2006, the CFE surveyed all academic department heads to identify the needs of faculty based on annual evaluation outcomes. Workshops and training activities in 2006-2007 were then planned for those topics suggested by at least 50% of the department heads responding (e.g., classroom incivility, assessment techniques, strategies for publishing, (Exhibit 5f.1).  The department head survey was repeated in May of 2007 in preparation for 2007-2008 activities. 

Within the COEHD, the Center for Educational Service and Research (CEDSAR) provides professional development for faculty in the Unit. CEDSAR assists faculty in professional growth, and provides faculty with materials to enrich teaching. In the Fall of 2006, CEDSAR’s collection of over 2500 reference materials was catalogued and made available to Unit faculty. Recently, CEDSAR has provided orientations, workshops and lectures for new faculty. In the Spring 2007, the Center sponsored a half-day workshop by Dr. David Cabell (author of Cabell’s Directories in Educational Curriculum and Methods, Educational Psychology & Administration, and Educational Technology & Library Science); Dr. Naquin (Kinesiology & Health Studies); and Ms. Campbell (Center for Faculty Excellence). Additionally, in the Fall of 2007, the Interim Director of CEDSAR offered a course for faculty members on writing for publication. 

Professional development activities related to performance assessment, diversity, technology, emerging practices, and the CF.  During 2006-2007, the CFE sponsored 89 workshops on a variety of topics that support the CF (Exhibit 5f.2.) Also, individual departments and colleges provided professional development activities consistent with best practices and the CF. In T&L, the technology committee offered in-services on: Blackboard, Smartboard, Excel, virtual presentation, E instruction, Passport, converting video, webmail, Turnitin, and podcasting (Exhibit 5f.3). In ELT, activities included training in the use of TURNITIN and compressed video equipment, as well as a session on strategic planning and marketing. Additionally, funds from the department and the Wallace grant were used to sponsor the Louisiana Council of Professors of Educational Administration Annual Conference. 

The Center for Faculty Excellence also sponsors a year-long Institute for Teaching and Professional Enhancement (ITPE) to provide faculty an opportunity for intensive training and dialogue in a selected area. The 2006-2007 institute, Issues in Assessment, continued the previous focus on scholarship and teaching with an emphasis on improving professional judgment in the grading process, particularly the grading of projects, portfolios or other creative assignments. Of the 14 participants, 29% were from the COEHD. 

Frequency of faculty participation in professional development activities. See Exhibit 5f.4 for the number of faculty participating in professional development activities and the number of hours reported by Unit faculty over a three-year period. The richness of professional development available on campus through the CFE is also evident in the Center’s annual Portfolio Fair and in numerous workshops provided on technology-specific topics as well as on topics related to teaching issues and emerging practices (e.g., civility in the classroom, assessment, service-learning, project-based learning). Thirty-six different faculty (about 52%) in the COEHD participated in one or more of 89 workshops (See Exhibit 5f.5.).

The CFE also supports faculty development through grant programs. During 2006-2007, proposals totaling $62,377 were funded for teaching initiatives with about 16% of the total awarded directly to faculty in the COEHD. The Center also funds research and travel grants to assist faculty in remaining at the forefront of their fields. During 2006-2007, approximately $128,012 was awarded across campus for travel grants, journal grants, mini grants, and faculty development grants with about 14% awarded directly to faculty in the COEHD (Exhibit 5f.6).