Skip to content
MSU Teacher Education Unit (TEU)

Standard 5

Element 1: Qualified Faculty
Element 2: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching
Element 3: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship
Element 4: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service
Element 5: Collaboration
Element 6: Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance
Element 7: Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

Standard 5. Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development. (Dec 23, 2003 2 pm)

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

Element 1: Qualified Faculty Top

The faculty are licensed in the fields that they teach or supervise and are master teachers, recognized for their competence in their field.

Initial and Advanced Programs

5.1.1 Faculty has earned doctorates or exceptional expertise.

Teacher Education faculty are defined as those faculty members who teach required core courses, professional education courses methods courses, or supervise practicum experiences. At least 65% of Teacher Education faculty has terminal degrees and an additional 10% are either ABD or are currently pursuing doctoral degrees. Faculty who do not hold a terminal degree has considerable expertise in the areas they teach and most have considerable P-12 school experience. (Appendix)

5.1.2 Faculty has contemporary professional experience in schools at all levels that they supervise and are licensed in the fields they teach or supervise.

State law prohibits the use of faculty as student teaching supervisors unless they have held a valid teaching license from a recognized jurisdiction. School-based clinical faculty members are also required to hold a valid teaching license and have at least three years teaching experience. In addition they are required to complete coursework or a workshop on how to properly supervise student teachers. All faculty members who supervise candidates in a clinical setting are or have been licensed. Over 60% of Teacher Education faculty teaching the required courses have P-12 classroom experience and together have a total of over 430 years of classroom experience.

Only school personnel approved by the school administration are placed in the pool of potential cooperating teachers. The expectation is that they are excellent teachers and well-qualified to mentor and supervise our candidates. The Unitís Director of Teacher Advisement and Field Placement has a knowledge of most cooperating teachers and strives to match our candidates with cooperating teachers who can best help the candidate grow as a teacher. On occasion candidates may be placed in remote locations that require the Unit to hire personnel to serve as university supervisors and cooperating teachers. The most common method used to meet these needs is to contact an area university and work with them to find both the cooperating teacher and the university supervisor. In cases where a local university is not able or willing to work with Minot State University, the Director then works with the local school superintendent or Central Office to hire suitable professionals. The Unit always strives to find people who are strong teachers to serve as cooperating teachers and hire only people with significant experience in supervision of teachers to serve as university supervisors.

5.1.3 Faculty are meaningfully engaged in related scholarship

A recent survey of Teacher Education faculty provided the following data: In the last five years over 266 publications were created, well over 385 presentations were made, and a total of over $5,600,000 in grants were written. A table summarizing faculty publications and presentations is presented in Appendix G, page 98. Some of the research efforts are described in the section 5.3.2.

Element 2: Modeling Best Professional Practices In Teaching Top

5.2.1 Faculty have an in-depth understanding of their fields and are teacher scholars who integrate what is known about their content fields, teaching, and learning in their own instructional practices.

A high percentage of Teacher Education faculty have terminal degrees in the subject areas they teach and exhibit their scholarship through publications, presentations, and participation in grant writing. The assignment of faculty is based upon their expertise in the subject areas they teach. Faculty regularly update their syllabi, review required textbooks, and revise methods of delivery to ensure that they present our candidates with the most current practices and knowledge in that field. Many faculty supplement course work with online resources including the use of "WEB CT" blended shells. A blended shell allows students to access course syllabi, notes, and quizzes in a manner similar to students who take these courses in an online setting.

A review of the assessments (Appendix F, page 97) used by faculty to rate candidates on how well they meet the INTASC and STATE standards illustrates how faculty utilize new teaching strategies and assessment techniques. A survey of faculty uses of technology and various teaching strategies illustrates that they are familiar with the best practices of the profession. A review of course syllabi also supports the claim that faculty use current materials and techniques in their courses.

5.2.2 Faculty exhibits intellectual vitality in their sensitivity to critical issues.

The survey of Unit faculty provided information on faculty teaching. The chart below provides an indication of how often faculty address critical issues in their instruction.

Issue
(Mean Score on a five-point Scale)
Always
(1)
Frequently
(2)
Occasionally
(3)
Seldom
(4)
Never
(5)
Critical Thinking (1.36)
28
13
1
0
0
Applying Knowledge (1.24)
36
6
0
0
0
Problem Solving (1.43)
28
11
2
1
0
Professional Dispositions (1.97)
20
8
6
0
3
Knowledge About Cultural Diversity (2.26)
11
13
13
1
1
Experiences with Cultural Diversity (2.55)
9
11
12
5
2
Knowledge About Exceptionalities (2.56)
10
8
13
5
2
Experiences with Exceptionalities (2.78)
8
9
10
7
4
Knowledge About Parent Involvement (2.73)
8
8
15
5
3
Experience With Parent Involvement (2.98)
7
6
14
5
7

5.2.3 Faculty teaching reflects the unitís conceptual framework and incorporates appropriate performance assessments and integrates diversity and technology throughout coursework, field experiences, and clinical practices.

The Unit has requested that coursework specific to Teacher Education illustrate the conceptual framework through the identification of course objectives as Action objectives; Reflection objectives; or Knowledge objectives. Each syllabus also identifies the Unit theme of Teachers As Reflective Decision-Makers and shows the Unit logo in the corner of the syllabi. Since the Unit has adopted the INTASC standards as goals, faculty uses these standards to guide them in the development of their syllabi. Each required Teacher Education course focuses on some or all of the INTASC standards. The Unit collects data on each candidate relative to these standards plus the eight teaching dispositions. The main focus of the programís assessment system is on the candidateís ability to perform. Early course work in the program often focuses on only a few of the INTASC Standards while senior level methods classes usually assess all of the Standards. Appendix B, page 93, illustrates the emphasis on performance in the Unitís programs. This reporting form requires the instructor to describe the performances used to assess candidate proficiencies in meeting program standards.

Seven of the required Teacher Education core courses are delivered in an online format. Faculty who teach these courses first completed a training course where they learned how to prepare and deliver online materials. Each online course is "beta tested" by the online faculty prior to releasing it to students. Courses in the core that are taught in an online format are: Special Education-110 Introduction to Exceptional Children, Psychology 255-Child and Adolescent Psychology, Education 201-Introduction to Teaching, Education 310-Foundations of Education, Education 320-Curriculum, Planning and Assessment, Ed 380-Technology in Teaching, and Education 470-Teaching Diverse Learners.

5. 2.4 Faculty value candidate learning and adjust instruction appropriately to enhance candidate learning.

A recent survey of faculty identified 30 different teaching strategies that most of the faculty members are always or frequently using in teaching the required core courses of the program. This large variety of strategies illustrates that faculty can and do use a variety of instructional methods to meet the needs of the candidates.

Strategy
Always Used
Frequently Used
Occasioinally Used
Seldom Used
Never Used
Hands-On Activites
26
15
6
0
0
Problem-Solving Activites
18
21
11
0
0
Group Projects
12
14
13
5
6
Individual Projects
35
11
5
1
1
Microteaching
8
14
9
3
9
Directed Observations
12
10
13
7
7
Mini Lectures
11
15
12
4
4
Peer Presentations
11
22
8
3
6
Demonstrations
16
13
10
4
2
Research Article Reviews
10
12
12
8
9
Directed Reading Activites
10
19
5
4
12
Whole Group Discussions
21
19
7
3
4
Small Group Discussions
24
9
9
2
8
Think Pair Share
14
11
3
6
13
Comprehension Strategies
6
20
5
10
5
Peer Critiques
7
17
9
3
13
Narrative Evaluations
6
16
5
7
11
Mid-term or Final Conferences
9
15
4
4
16
Formal Written course Evaluations
32
3
7
2
5
Debriefing
12
15
3
2
15
Field Experiences
24
6
6
2
10
Analytical Reasoning
18
13
7
5
8
Student Self-Assessment
21
10
7
5
7
Concept Comparison
14
11
9
4
8
Concept Teaching
19
12
8
3
5
Interaction Discussion
18
15
7
2
5
Cooperative Learning
25
11
6
4
4
Reflective Journals
22
6
1
1
13
Modeling
26
11
3
2
6
Expository Discussion
7
16
10
1
11

5.2.6 Faculty understands assessment technology and use multiple forms of assessments in determining their effectiveness, and uses the data to improve their practice.

Each university faculty member is provided with a networked computer with Internet access and necessary software to assist in assessment, record keeping, and curriculum development. Additionally all faculty have support from the university in terms of training and maintenance relative to computer technology. Many faculty members require students to submit assignments in an online format and about half of the faculty members have placed their syllabi on web pages. Currently seven of the core courses are offered in an online environment, and many instructors also use a blended shell to support their regular on campus classes. They use the technology available through that medium to assess student learning.

The university has technology that supports the use of Scantron scoring for multiple-choice exams. This service may be used by Teacher Education faculty and they are then able to take advantage of the analysis provided by the software that accompanies it. Faculty, especially in Teacher Education, use a huge variety of assessment techniques, but the most popular ones are the traditional forms of testing and essay writing with a significant number of performance assessments. Unit faculty are required to assess candidates on the INTASC Standards using authentic performance tasks that they then describe in the data sheet they submit to the Unit.

5.2.7 Faculty are recognized as outstanding teachers by candidates and peers across campus and in schools.

Over the last five years 13 University faculty have been recognized as either instructor or researcher of the year and 12 of them are Teacher Education faculty. All faculty at Minot State University are evaluated annually. These evaluations are carried out primarily by the respective department chairs who collect assessment data from course and faculty evaluations, personal observations, and a variety of other reports provided by the Records Office.

Most faculty distribute course and instructor evaluations to their students in the last week of the semester and these evaluations are carried to the department secretary who records the student comments and forwards the form to the Academic Affairs Office where they are scanned and the results tabulated. These course and instructor evaluations are a key element in the evaluation of faculty as instructors. Students are expected to respond to several statements that reflect on the teaching skills of the faculty. The following is a partial list of the statements found on the course and instructor evaluation forms that students respond to using a five-point Likert scale:

1. This course was well organized.
2. The instructor maintains reasonable expectations for the course.
3. The instructor motivated me to learn the course material.
4. The exams and assignments challenged me to think and to apply what I had learned.
5. I feel the evaluation of my work was fair.
6. All things considered, how would you rate the teaching effectiveness of this instructor?

The following table presents a summary of candidate Course and Faculty Evaluations for all courses assessed in the University as a whole and for Teacher Education courses for that same time frame. This table shows a comparison for Spring 2003.

Maximum Score of 5
Course Was Well Organized
Maintained Reasonable Expectations
Instructor Motivated Me
Challenged Me to Think and To Apply
Evaluation of My Work Was Fair
Teaching Effectiveness
Mean of All University Faculty
4.25
4.27
4.13
4.33
4.35
4.20
Mean of Teacher Education Faculty
4.29
4.47
4.15
4.46
4.40
4.24

Element 3: Modeling Best Professional Practices In Scholarship Top

5.3.1 Faculty demonstrates scholarly work related to teaching, learning, and in their fields of specialization.

The data from the table in Appendix G, page 98, illustrates that Teacher Education faculty in the last five years have produced over 266 publications and made over 385 presentations.

5.3.2 Faculty are engaged in inquiry that ranges from knowledge generation to exploration and questioning of the field to evaluating the effectiveness of teaching approaches.

Below is a list of a few of the publications by faculty where the topic illustrates the commitment of Unit faculty to inquiry in the profession.

Dr. Robin Clark

"Learning from New Teachers," co-presented with Dr. Mary Harris, University of North Texas; Dr. Linda Holdman, University of North Dakota; American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE) annual meeting; Dallas, TX; March 2001

"Art, Curriculum, and School Violence," panel presentation; National Art Education Association (NAEA) annual conference; Los Angeles, CA; March 2000

Clark, R. E. (2002). Performance assessment in the arts. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 39(1), 29-32.

Dr. Leslie Baldwin

Literacy and the reluctant student with Dr. R. Truax and Dr. S. Nayer ACE-DHH Conference, San Diego, CA, Feb 2001

Group Editing and Peer Teaching in ASL and English Conference of American Instructors of the Deaf Special Interest group (TELA) conference (Teachers of English and Language Arts) Ohio School for the Deaf Columbus, OH, June, 1998

Cheryl Nilsen

"The Math and Drama Connection," North Dakota Council of Teachers of Mathematics Spring Conference, Minot, ND, Mar., 2003.

"Lessons in Geometry and Algebra," 2 workshops, North Dakota Council of Teachers of Mathematics Spring Conference, Minot, ND, Mar., 2003.

Dr. Maila Zitelli

"The New ACTFL/NCATE Standards for Foreign Language Teacher Education." Conference presentation for FLAND, Spring 2002. Proxy presenter: LeAnne Tracy, 1st President Elect, FLAND.

"New Pedagogy Capstone Projects: Aligning Student Research with Career Goals," presented at the AATG-sponsored ACTFL Conference Session of which I was the organizer. Washington, D.C., November, 2001.

Dr. Margi Coxwell

"Learning Styles", a chapter for an on-line book on college teaching and learning, through the Collaboration for the Advancement of College Teaching and Learning, St. Paul, MN, Summer 2002.

"Books for the Effective Teaching of Young Children", Montana State Reading Journal, Spring 2003.

Dr. Linda Cresap

Cresap, L. (September 2002). Same content, less time and online too? An assignment for meeting the challenge. Business Communication Quarterly 65 (3), 76-80 (refereed).

Willoughby, L. & Cresap, L. (2002). A preliminary comparison of student learning in the online vs. the traditional instructional environment, Issues in Information Systems, 667-672 (refereed)

Dr. David Harpster

Teaching and Assessing Higher-Order Thinking Skills, NDCTM Spring Conference, Minot, ND, March 2003.

Modeling with Real-World Data, NDCTM/NDEA Instructional Conference, Bismarck, ND, October 2002.

Developed and presented a workshop on writing questions that assess higher-order thinking skills to a group of elementary school teachers in Devils Lake, ND, August 5, 2002.

Developed and presented a workshop on problem solving to a group of elementary school teachers in Dickinson, ND, June 3, 2002.

Dr. Nancy Hall

Hall, P. & Hall, N. (2003). Educating Oppositional and Defiant Children. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Hall, P. & Hall, N. (2003). Building relationships with challenging children. Educational Leadership, 61 (1), 60-63.

Hall, P. & Hall, N. (2002). Hiring and retaining direct care staff: After fifty years of research, what do we know? Mental Retardation, 40 (3), 201-211.

Hall, N., Williams, J., Hall, P. (2000). Fresh approaches with oppositional students.

Dr. Joseph Jastrzembski

The Mandan Language and Oral Traditions Preservation Project: The (Re)creation of Culturally Relevant Texts, "Plains Indian Education Conference, Buffalo Bill Historical Center, Cody, Wyoming, 2001

Element 4: Modeling Best Professional Practice in Service Top

5.4.1 Faculty are actively engaged in dialogue about the design and delivery of instructional programs.

As described TEGUís Assessment System faculty are fully involved with the design and delivery of the professional program of the Unit. From the work of the Program and Policy Committee to the annual retreats faculty are the ones who directed the design of the Teacher Education program and continue to refine it.

5.4.2 Faculty works in schools

Often faculty works with local jurisdictions to use their expertise in the improvement of P-12 teaching and learning. Over 50 presentations were made to local and state organizations by Unit faculty. Many faculty hold leadership positions at the local, state, and national levels and Minot State is known for its contributions to the development of curriculum for both the Education Standards and Practices Board and the Department of Public Instruction.

5.4.3 Faculty provides leadership in the profession, schools, and professional associations.

Currently Dr. Neil Nordquist, the Dean of the College of Education and Health Sciences serves as the Governor appointed Higher Education representative on the Education Standards and Practices Board (ESPB) (as did his predecessor) and he also serves as the Chair of the Program Approval Advisory Committee (PAAC) that has responsibility for advising on program accreditation for Teacher Education programs in the state. Cheryl Nilsen, Co-chair of the Program and Policy Committee, has served as an NCATE BOE team chair on three occasions and as team member four times. Dr. Robin Clark and Dr. Ron Royer have chaired state teams for accreditation visits in recent years, and several other faculty have served as team members for state teams. Dr. Nordquist and Dr. Nancy Hall are certified to work with prospective school administrators in an NASSP program that focuses on performance assessment and work with the North Dakota LEAD Center and Educational Leadership programs at UND and NDSU.

Recently Mr. Gary Leslie, while serving as Interim Dean, and Dr. Nordquist hosted an Interactive Television Network (IVN) meeting of Teacher Education leaders, School District leaders, ESPB members, Department of Public Instruction officials, and our Congressman, Mr. Earl Pomeroy to discuss the concerns raised by the "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) legislation. Unit faculty took part in ESPB sponsored meetings to align teacher education standards with P-12 content standards and to develop a portfolio process for practicing teachers to use in meeting the "highly qualified" teacher definition developed as a result of NCLB legislation. In November of 2003 several faculty from Minot State University attended ESPB sponsored meetings to review and revise teacher education accreditation standards and to develop a form to allow universities to recognize teaching major equivalencies. In September 2003 three of our faculty were part of the team that set the cut scores for the new Praxis II tests in elementary education and for the PLT test to be used as a licensure requirement for teachers effective 2006. Additionally faculty have held and do hold leadership positions in national organizations including accreditation boards.

Methods instructors, who also supervise candidate practicum experiences, visit their candidates in the schools and work with them and the clinical faculty to make the candidatesí first teaching experience meaningful and reflective. Faculty model excellent teaching in their university classrooms and encourage candidates in their methods practicum and student teaching to emulate best practice. Faculty works with clinical teachers to encourage them to continue to model good teaching skills and dispositions.

Element 5: Collaboration Top

5.5.1 Faculty are engaged as a community of learners regarding the conceptual framework and scholarship of the classroom.

Faculty collaborates with their school partners in formal and informal settings to assess the effectiveness of the programs at Minot State and in the state. From the annual retreats to the work of the Program and Policy committee faculty constantly work in a collaborative manner to improve the Unitís ability to prepare teachers and other school professionals.

5.5.2 Faculty develop relationships, programs and projects with colleagues in P-12 schools, faculty at other institutions to conduct research, make presentations, publish materials, and improve the quality of education for all students.

Teacher Education faculty from Minot State University are integrally involved with many of the educational organizations in their community, state, region, and nationally. Faculty from the Unit are part of a number of organizations; the Minot Association of Teacher Educators, the North Dakota Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, the Northwest School Leaders, the Minot Public Schools-Minot State University Partnership, the Program Approval Advisory Committee, the Education Standards and Practices Board, Department of Public Instruction state curriculum initiatives, and many other discipline specific organizations where faculty hold membership.

The organization of the Unit is set up as a community of learners with the program and policy committee leading the way assisted by the Stakeholdersí Advisory Committee and by the Teacher Education Governance Unit faculty at their annual retreat. Faculty participates with local districts in a number of initiatives to improve teaching and learning. Some of these are mentioned in Appendix G (page 98).

During the summer of 2003 Social Science faculty hosted a national symposium on Lewis and Clark that was attended by teachers from almost every state of the Union.

Element 6: Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance Top

5.6.1 The unitís systematic and comprehensive evaluation system includes regular and comprehensive reviews of professional education facultyís teaching, scholarship, service, collaboration with the professional community, and leadership in the institution and profession.

Teacher Education faculty, along with all other faculty on campus, are evaluated annually on the basis of teaching, scholarship, and service. This evaluation is conducted by the Department Chair and forwarded to the Dean who reviews it and forwards it to the Vice-President of Academic Affairs. This evaluation is shared with faculty who actually initiate the process by submitting a self-assessment to the department or division chair. The faculty assessment system at the university focuses on teaching, scholarship, and service in order to gain tenure or promotion.

Unit faculty members are required to have course and instructor evaluations completed for at least some of their courses each year. Non-tenured faculty have all of their courses evaluated each semester while tenured faculty are required to have courses evaluated at least once a year. The course and instructor evaluation form was developed and approved by faculty senate and is included in faculty annual evaluations.

The Unit includes faculty from all three colleges. The responsibility for faculty assessments and evaluation is assumed by the faculty memberís department chair. Since the main decision-making body for the Unit (TEAC) has representation by each of the college deans or their designate, the assessment of Unit faculty is well represented in the Unit itself. Unit scholarship, service, and collaboration will be reviewed on an aggregate basis each year as part of the annual retreat.

Element 7: Unit Facilitation of Professional Development Top

5.7.1 The unit has policies and practices that encourage all professional education faculty to be continuous learners.

The Program and Policy Committee has a standing sub-committee responsible for professional development in the Unit and this sub-committee has responsibility to organize orientation activities for new faculty. Minot State University also provides a comprehensive orientation for new faculty to explain policies and procedures unique to our campus.

The University encourages all faculty to be continuous learners through initiatives developed with the Bush Grant as well as research grants for which faculty may apply each year. Several faculty are also supported in obtaining advanced degrees through the "Grow Your Own Fund" administered through the Vice-President of Academic Affairsí office.

Early in 2004 the College of Education and Health Sciences obtained significant funds to promote professional development in College and Teacher Education faculty. This professional development fund will be administered by the CEHS Leadership Council and will focus on obtaining recognized skills in improving teaching and learning to benefit university students.

5.7.2 Experienced faculty mentor new faculty, providing encouragement and support for developing scholarly work around teaching, inquiry, and service.

Minot State University utilizes the Bush Grant to sponsor several opportunities for faculty to grow professionally. The "Partners in Learning" (PIL) project supports individual faculty in a partnership arrangement with a faculty member from another discipline to gather data through observations and interviews on the effectiveness of faculty as instructors. This "Partners in Learning" process is highly valued by the faculty as they claim it helps them make significant improvements in their abilities as teachers. The Bush Grant also supports "Learning Community Grants" which have been utilized by many departments to provide the resources to allow faculty to hold meetings or retreats where they can have the time to dialogue about their respective programs. These grants also allow faculty from different departments to gain funding for interdisciplinary projects.

The university supports scholarship initiatives by faculty by providing grants at the university and college. Occasionally resources are also provided for significant projects that have the potential to enhance teaching and learning on the campus. Dr. Warren Gamas and Dr. Kevin Pruzac received substantial funds to establish a "Pedagogy Lab" that allows faculty and candidates to study teaching behavior through the use of digital video cameras and the editing capabilities of "I-Movie".

Since the Unit covers ten different departments or divisions from all three colleges, the orientation and mentoring of new faculty is the primary responsibility of department and division chairs and the faculty in those departments. The professional development subcommittee from the Program and Policy Committee are also charged to be sure new faculty are aware of the policies and procedures of the Unit.

On the university campus Teacher Education faculty are often asked to share their expertise with colleagues and have played a particularly important role in the Bush Grant initiative that focuses on the improvement of teaching and learning on the campus. Some of the presenters were Dr. Jack Rasmussen, former Dean, who presented on using humor in the classroom, Dr. Neil Nordquist, current Dean, who presented a series of workshops on the use of Understanding by Design concepts developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, and Dr. Lisa Borden-King presented workshops on how to use rubrics or scoring guides.