Criterion 1 Progress Report, Artifacts/Evidence


  1. Course Evaluation:
    1. Due to time constraints and load of department chair duties, I failed to create and use my own end of course survey and no end of course survey data has been provided by the university office of institutional research. I did utilize a mid-semester survey in ED 3350. Here is a link to the data: Fall 2016 Mid-Semester Survey Data. In this survey I asked about four things: accessibility of information on D2L; usability of reading materials; what has worked well this term; and what has been difficult. It is clear from the data that the way in which I use D2L and the course binder is very helpful to students in staying on track, finding information, and keeping organized. Even with that, some students still expressed times of being overwhelmed, while some did express that there was too much information and it was then difficult to find what they were looking for. I began semester 2 with an introductory activity that required students to look through D2L and the course syllabus at the beginning of the term to aid in their understanding of where to find information. I do not have data as of yet, but I have found I have answered fewer question (in class or email) about where to access information, due dates, turning things in, etc.
    2. There were a few comments that assignments could have been clarified. At the beginning of each unit in Term 2 the instructions for the summative project for the unit are handed out. As part of the initial inquiry assignment for the unit, students are to review the assignment expectations and record questions to bring to the next class session.
  2. Sense Making:
    1. Time was provided at the end of most classes. In checking their binders at the end of each unit, it is clear that they are doing a better job of tracking what we are learning, aligning that content to standards and the course essential questions, and completing the learning map (to map out connections between concepts). In Term 2 I revised the rubric for the binder, to further emphasize the importance of making corrections and additions to graded work. Additionally, I have added in a practice of taking time the day a summative assessment is due to provide the students time for peer evaluation. I tell them to “Pair and share, not trade and grade.” Students are provided time to sit with a partner and use the assignment rubric to collaboratively evaluate each others assignment. This results in higher quality work, plus also gives them hands-on experience evaluating work with a grading rubric.
  3. Student Binder Portfolio:
    1. This has been successful. With the introduction of a more specific rubric in Spring term, I am seeing even more diligence in the sense-making process at the end of each class session.
      1. Example of Binder Check Rubric from Fall Term
      2. Revised Binder Rubric for Spring Term
  4. ED 3350 Topic Sequence
    1. Fall term, Dr. Colburn and I re-arranged the sequence of units. This was not successful. For spring term we have changed back to teaching “unit planning” prior to “lesson planning.” This fits better with a backwards design methodology. Spring term unit planning projects are of higher quality than fall term as a result.
  5. I taught ED 2925: People and the Environment in Fall term collaboratively with Dr. Desiderato, Dr. Kivi, Dr. Isaacson, and Ms. Bailey-Johnson. Despite this being my first term working with this team I was an equal participant in the planning and delivery of the large-group session of the course.
    1. ED 2925: People and the Environment Course Syllabus
  6. Department Chair Leadership
    1. 13 individuals responded to the The Chair Efficacy Survey. Of those, 11 individuals rated me at the maximum for nearly every question. 2 individuals rated me at the minimum for nearly every question. Here is a link to the data for the Chair Efficacy Survey Data (2016-17)
    2. The curriculum map was utilized in the fall assessment workday to review the current curriculum and begin identify areas of overlaps and gaps in the curriculum. During spring term we will embark on the task of evaluating this information and brainstorming potential changes (if any) to the scope and sequence of the undergraduate teacher licensure program.
    3. The final aspect of program information was input to the MN Board of Teaching system (EPPAS)
    4. I have had multiple conversations with the registrar about possible ways to address the inequity of student teaching credits as aligned to length of student teaching experiences. A final solution has not been arrived at as of yet.
    5. The department has continued to use the PLC as a place for informal brainstorming of ideas related to department tasks–such as discussing potential changes to the “dispositions” data collection regarding student dispositions.

Criterion 2 Goals