Edit this Form

Web Print

---

2003 NCATE Annual Report (Part C of the AACTE Annual Report) [Printable Version]

Section 1 - Institutional Information:

NCATE ID:	10219
AACTE SID:	773
Institution:	Columbus State University
Unit:	College of Education
Next Accreditation Visit:	S05
Last Accreditation Visit	F98
Deadline to Submit Final Version of Part C:	10/01/2003

Section 2 - Individual Contact Information

Unit Head Name:	Dr. Thomas Harrison
Unit Head Email:	harrison_thomas@colstate.edu
Unit Head Phone:	(706) 568-2212
Unit Head Fax:	(706) 569-3134
Institution Unit Phone:	(706) 568-2045
1st NCATE Coordinator:	Dr. Deborah Gober
1st Coordinator Title:	NCATE Coordinator
1st Coordinator Phone:	(706) 568-2045
1st Coordinator Fax:	(706) 569-3134
1st Coordinator Email:	gober_deborah@colstate.edu
2nd NCATE Coordinator:
2nd Coordinator Title:
2nd Coordinator Phone:
2nd Coordinator Fax:
2nd Coordinator Email:
CEO:	Dr. Frank D.Brown
CEO Phone:	(706) 568-2211
CEO Fax:	(706) 568-2123
CEO Email:	brown_frank@colstate.edu

Is the information above accurate?

Corrected Unit Head:
Corrected Title of Unit Head
Corrected Unit Head Email:
Corrected Unit Head Phone:
Corrected Unit Head Fax:
Corrected 2nd Unit Head:
Corrected Title of 2nd Unit Head
Corrected 2nd Unit Head Email:
Corrected 2nd Unit Head Fax:
Corrected Institution Unit Phone:
Corrected 1st NCATE Coordinator:
Corrected 1st Coordinator Title
Corrected 1st Coordinator Phone:
Corrected 1st Coordinator Fax:
Corrected 1st Coordinator Email:
Corrected 2nd NCATE Coordinator:
Corrected 2nd Coordinator Title:
Corrected 2nd Coordinator Phone:
Corrected 2nd Coordinator Fax:
Corrected 2nd Coordinator Email:
Corrected CEO Full Name:
Corrected CEO Phone:
Corrected CEO Fax:
Corrected CEO Email:

Section 3 - NCATE Standards Categories & Weaknesses Section





Section A. Conceptual Framework(s)

The conceptual framework(s) establishes the shared vision for a unit's efforts in preparing educators to work effectively in P-12 schools. It provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, scholarship, service, and unit accountability. The conceptual framework(s) is knowledge-based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with the unit and/or institutional mission, and continuously evaluated.

Please indicate evaluations of and changes made to the unit's conceptual framework (if any) during this year:

Since our last NCATE visit in 1998, the College of Education at Columbus State University has facilitated numerous discussions relating to the COE Conceptual Framework and its role in decision-making processes. These discussions involved a number of key stakeholders including university faculty members and staff, P-12 classroom teachers, and CSU students. As a result of these discussions, it became clear that the existing Conceptual Framework needed to be simplified and refined to better reflect and communicate the shared vision of the faculty and other stakeholders. In the fall of AY 2002-2003, the Conceptual Framework Committee initiated the revision process by calling a COE Faculty Meeting to reexamine our vision and beliefs, reevaluate the existing Conceptual Framework, and establish general guidelines for the revision process. Throughout the months following the Faculty Meeting, the Conceptual Framework Committee met frequently to discuss, modify, and refine the existing Conceptual Framework to better reflect the mission of the COE. The revised framework will be shared with the faculty in Fall 2003, and upon final approval, will be integrated throughout the COE. In AY 2002-2003, COE faculty continued to share and discuss ideas and issues related to the preparation of teachers, counselors, and leaders as they participated in monthly forums organized by the Conceptual Framework Committee. These ongoing discussions help to clarify our vision and common beliefs as we work together to improve teaching and learning at all levels. Other activities in the College of Education followed up on developments in previous years. The COE continued the implementation and refinement of the performance assessment plan, the Model of Appropriate Practice (MAP), for all undergraduate programs in the College of Education. In addition, an ad-hoc committee on dispositions designed a Dispositions Rubric and an evaluation instrument to assess candidates in the area of dispositions. The implementation and refinement of the MAP along with the creation of the Dispositions Rubric have served to better align undergraduate programs with the COE Conceptual Framework. Items noted in the unit's response to a weakness reported by the 1998 BOE are equally applicable in this discussion. Please refer to them.

Conceptual framework weaknesses cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

The conceptual framework has not been integrated across the unit's programs.

The unit continued its efforts to both clarify and integrate its conceptual framework. Activities conducted in AY 2002-2003 that reflect clarification and integration of the conceptual framework are these: a) use of a handbook for adjunct faculty including orientation to the conceptual framework b) utilization of junior/senior teacher candidates ("The Pyramid Team") to introduce students in their initial professional course to the conceptual framework and INTASC Principles c) faculty forums that address NCATE-related topics, ways to better use the conceptual framework, and so forth d) emphasis on conceptual framework (INTASC) during implementation and evaluation of the performance assessment plan (MAP) for undergraduate teacher preparation programs e) distribution of the conceptual framework brochure to cooperating teachers, new faculty, students and other members of the professional community f) use of a bulletin board in a high-traffic area emphasizing components of the Conceptual Framework g) use of a performance assessment handbook for faculty and students which includes a synopsis of the conceptual framework and correlation of the performance assessment plan with INTASC Standards. Items noted in the unit's response to evaluations of and changes made to the unit's conceptual framework (if any) during this year are equally applicable in this discussion. Please refer to them.

Section B. Candidate Performance

Standard 1. Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that cnadidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Please describe the unit's plans for and progress in meeting this standard. (Refer to the NCATE 2000 Unit Transition Plan for information regarding the levels at which units should address Standards 1 and 2 during the first year of NCATE Unit Standrds implementation)

In AY 2002-2003, the Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions Committee continued to provide leadership in preparing candidates who know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. The main focus of the committee's work in 2002-2003 was the development of frameworks for assessing students enrolled in COE graduate programs. Frameworks are being developed for teacher education, counseling, and educational leadership. These frameworks will focus on providing opportunities for graduate students to develop and demonstrate expertise and leadership consistent with their professional responsibilities and duties. Work on these frameworks is ongoing and recommendations will be made to the faculty in Fall 2003. A key development in AY 2002-2003 was the creation of a Dispositions Rubric and evaluation instrument to document and assess professional dispositions. Plans for AY 2003-2004 include the infusion of the rubric in all undergraduate programs in the COE. The instrument will enable the COE to better instruct, mentor, and assess candidates in the area of dispositions. Ongoing efforts related to candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions included the evaluation and refinement of the Model of Appropriate Practice (MAP), a systematic performance assessment plan for all undergraduate programs in the College of Education. The MAP is used to instruct, mentor, and assess teacher candidates as they acquire and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Efforts were also made to collaborate more closely with teacher preparation faculty in the College of Science and the College of Arts and Letters as we prepare teacher candidates and assess their content knowledge. These efforts resulted in special initiatives in some programs, such as the Early Mentoring Program in Secondary English and Secondary History, that provide additional support for teacher candidates as they develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed in P-12 classrooms.

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 1 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

None.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).
Standard 2. Assessment System and Unit Evaluation
The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on the applicant qualifications, candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs.

Please describe the unit's plans for and progress in meeting this standard. (Refer to the NCATE 2000 Unit Transition Plan for information regarding the levels at which units should address Standards 1 and 2 during the first year of NCATE Unit Standards implementation)

The Assessment Committee provided leadership in the development of a comprehensive assessment plan for the COE. Though the COE has been collecting and analyzing data since the last NCATE visit in 1998, there has been no comprehensive, systematic assessment plan in place. The Assessment Committee began the task of developing a comprehensive plan by identifying key transition points and identifying data that is collected, aggregated, and analyzed at each transition point. A matrix was created to delineate the transition points, data to be collected, persons responsible for data collection, and persons responsible for data compilation and analysis. The assessment plan will be shared with faculty in AY 2003-2004 and used to manage the ongoing collection and analysis of data. As part of the development of the COE Assessment Plan, the Assessment Committee developed two online surveys. A follow-up survey was created to collect data from undergraduate and graduate program completers to determine their satisfaction with the professional preparation they received from the COE. Another survey was created to collect data from supervisors of teachers, counselors, and administrators who completed their professional preparation program at CSU. The survey will provide data on the satisfaction of supervisors with the preparation received from CSU by the teachers, counselors, and administrators under their supervision. The data collected from both surveys will be available in an Excel format and used to inform decisions regarding program changes. The development and refinement of a student database also continued in AY 2002-2003. The database contains information about COE students that will be used to analyze applicant qualifications and candidate and graduate performance. In previous years, the Model of Appropriate Practice (MAP), an instrument used to collect data on undergraduate teacher education candidates and COE programs, was developed and implemented. An evaluation of this instrument occurred in Spring 2003. One of the needs revealed by this evaluation was the need for a simplified version of the rubric for use by cooperating teachers in P-12 schools. This change, along with continued training of clinical faculty in the use of the MAP, will hopefully lead to greater reliability and validity in scoring. Faculty also discussed the procedures for collecting, aggregating, and analyzing the student data collected from the MAP. These procedures will be clearly defined in the COE Assessment Plan, which is to be presented to faculty in AY 2003-2004.

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 2 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

None.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).
Section C. Unit capacity

Standard 3. Field Experiences and Clinical Practice.
The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical practice so that teacher candidates and other school personnel develop and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn.
Please indicate any significant evaluations, changes and/or improvements related to Standard 3 that occurred in your unit this year:

In AY 2002-2003, the Field Experiences and Clinical Practice Committee continued to refine the procedures for placing teacher candidates in P-12 Partner Schools for their field experiences. Additional Building Coordinators were added in Spring 2003 to serve as liaisons between the COE and teachers in P-12 classrooms and to assist the College of Education in designing, delivering, and evaluating field experiences. Also, the Building Coordinator Handbook was revised and distributed to provide coordinators with specific information regarding each field experience. The Office of College of Education Services and Field Experiences (SAFE), in collaboration with clinical faculty in the Partner Schools Network, arranged a total of 1006 field experience placements and 102 student teaching placements during the academic year. SAFE continued to use the Field Placement Database to assure diverse placements for each teacher candidate. Another important accomplishment in AY 2002-2003 was the development of several assessment instruments to allow teacher candidates to evaluate their field experiences and student teaching. The Field Experience Survey, Student Teacher Program Survey, and Student Teacher Self Assessment Survey were administered at the end of Fall 2002 and Spring 2003. The data collected from these surveys will be used to improve the procedures for placing teacher candidates in P-12 schools and to enhance the quality of candidates' field experiences.

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 3 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

None.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).
Standard 4. Diversity
The unit designs, implements, and evaluates curriculum and experiences for candidates to acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. These experiences include working with diverse higher education and school faculty, diverse candidates, and diverse students in P-12 schools.

Please indicate any significant evaluations, changes and/or improvements related to Standard 4 that occurred in your unit this year:

The Diversity Committee, which consists of representatives from the business community, Muscogee County School District, and COE faculty and staff, continued to lead efforts to expand thinking about diversity in the COE. The committee revised the COE mission statement to better reflect our commitment to diversity. This commitment is further evident in the development of an undergraduate diversity course to be approved and then offered in AY 2003-2004. The course will encompass the many aspects of diversity, as well as provide teacher candidates with teaching strategies and skills that will enable them to help all students learn. Another important activity that occurred in AY 2002-2003 was the hiring of a consultant to construct and administer a survey to assess the climate for diversity in the COE. The survey was administered to a sample of faculty and staff, current students, and graduate students during the summer of 2003. The consultant to COE will analyze the data gathered from the survey and results will be shared with faculty and staff. These results will provide direction for ongoing efforts by the COE to respond to diversity issues. Other continuing efforts support the ongoing emphasis on diversity issues in the COE. a) Diversity is a key component in the Model of Appropriate Practice (MAP) that was implemented in AY 2001-2002. Teacher candidates continue to demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions (as described in MAP) that enable them to work effectively with diverse students and help all students learn. b) The Office of College of Education Services and Field Experiences (SAFE) ensured suitable placements of candidates in sites where they may acquire and refine the skills and knowledge necessary to help all students learn. An extensive database is maintained in the SAFE Office to ensure that teacher candidates have experiences in diverse settings. c) The ability to work with diverse individuals is also a key component in the Dispositions Rubric which was developed in AY 2002-2003 and will be implemented during the current academic year. The COE continues to recruit and retain a diverse pool of education candidates at both initial and advanced levels. Among full-time undergraduates, 70% percent (549 out of 787) are white, 23% percent (182 out of 787) are African-American, and the remainder represent other minorities. Among full-time graduate students, 74% percent (372 out of 502) are white, 23% percent (115 out of 502) are African American, and the remainder represent other minorities. Among initial program completers, 20% percent (20 out of 99) were minority. In advanced programs, 23 percent (47 out of 208) of the recipients of M.Ed. or Ed.S. degrees were minority, primarily African Americans. Unit faculty are increasingly diverse. Please see the discussion in response to the weakness cited in 1998 for details and commentary (following).

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 4 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

The college has not been successful in recruiting and retaining a diverse faculty.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).

Since the 1998 continuing accreditation visit, the COE has hired and retained additional minority faculty members. Currently, three of the 39 full-time faculty (8% percent) in the unit are minority. One minority faculty member was granted tenure in AY 2002-2003. The COE continues to work with University Admissions, Minority Affairs, International and Multicultural Affairs, and other individuals and organizations to achieve a more diverse faculty and student body.

Standard 5. Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development.
Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance. They also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.

Please indicate any significant evaluations, changes and/or improvements related to Standard 5 that occurred in your unit this year:

The COE continues to hire and retain a well-qualified faculty. Tenure-track faculty with full-time teaching responsibilities hold earned doctorates and display rich P-12 experience. Many unit faculty provide leadership to state, regional, and national professional organizations. In AY 2002-2003, a number of COE faculty received faculty development funds from the university to pursue research or course development in their fields. As in previous years, the Faculty Qualifications, Performance and Development Committee sponsored a Faculty Development Showcase to provide an opportunity for faculty to share their research or course enhancements with the COE. The Educational Technology Training Center (ETTC), the Columbus Regional Mathematics Collaborative (CRMC), the Science Education Outreach Center, the Coca Cola Space Science Center, the Oxbow Meadows Environmental Learning Center, and the Child Care Resource and Referral Agency of West Central Georgia and Columbus (CCRRA) continue to enhance the unit?s ability to affect educational practice in West Central Georgia by providing a variety of resources, training, and professional development activities for surrounding communities. These centers are an integral part of the COE and facilitate the collaboration between university faculty and P-12 teachers, counselors, and administrators.

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 5 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

None.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).
Standard 6. Unit Governance and Resources.
The unit has the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources, including information technology resources, for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Please indicate any significant evaluations, changes and/or improvements related to Standard 6 that occurred in your unit this year:

In AY 2002-2003, the COE continued to provide the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources to support the preparation of candidates. Ongoing efforts include: a) Support of the activities of constituent groups including Program Advisory Committees for each academic program and the Educator Preparation Program Council b) Support for the Partner School Network c) Support of the Office of COE Services and Field Experiences (SAFE) which provides a variety of services for students. The COE also provided funds from the CSU Capital Campaign to support the work of standing committees. These funds enabled the Diversity Committee to hire a consultant to work with the COE in assessing the climate for diversity. The Conceptual Framework Committee and Assessment Committee used some of their allotted funds to send several faculty members to NCATE/AACTE conferences. The information gathered at these conferences will facilitate preparations for the next NCATE visit. A key development in AY 2002-2003 was the securing of Jordan Hall for the College of Education. Major renovations to Jordan Hall enhanced the teaching and learning environment in the COE. Classrooms are equipped with technology for use by teachers and students. Computer labs are also available. In addition, Jordan Hall now houses the Columbus Regional Mathematics Collaborative and the Educational Technology Training Center, thus making the services and resources provided by those centers more readily available to COE faculty and students.

Areas of Improvement related to Standard 6 cited as a result of the last NCATE review:

The College of Education does not have a written policy covering the governance and facilitation of teacher education programs offered outside of the college.

Please indicate how the unit has addressed these areas of improvement (Optional).

As described in a previous Annual Report (1998-1999), Part C, the institution and unit now have a suitable written policy regarding the unit's authority over programs nominally housed outside the College of Education (art, music, and theatre). The policy is currently being updated to include the Foreign Language programs which are housed in the College of Arts and Letters.

Section 4 - Program Completers

The total number of candidates who completed education programs (intial & advanced) during the 2002-2003 academic year? 307


Enter the Name of the Person Filling Out the Report: Deborah Gober