Comparison of COEs Average COE: 1 Associate Dean 5 Department Chairs 2 Directors 62 faculty 1,162 undergrads 634 graduate stdts NAU COE: 1 Associate Dean 4 Department Chairs 3 Directors 104 faculty (500+ part- time) 2,464 undergrads 3,966 graduate stdts

Fall ‘02 Education Undergraduate Students (source: IPEDS 7/9/03)

Fall ’02 Largest NAU Undergraduate Majors

Fall ‘02 Education Graduate Students (source: IPEDS 7/9/03)

All Certificates in Arizona, (Source: ADE)

Administrative Certificates Arizona, (Source: ADE)

Quality Issues for COE graduates: We seek to produce teachers who possess deep knowledge of the subjects, firm understanding of how students learn teaching skills (students achieve to high standards), ability to create a positive learning environment, competent use of a variety of assessment strategies, ability to integrate modern technology, collaborative and communication skills, inclination to pursue professional growth, capacity to instill a passion for learning.

Quality Issues for COE graduates: Other factors from departmental work problem-solving abilities, commitment to ethical decision making, awareness of social and cultural implications of schooling. We seek to produce teachers who possess

Survey Monkey ResultsMonkey Goal: To understand current status of the College of Education.

Challenges/threats National criticism: Education schools are “nothing” and, worse, are largely to blame for students’ abysmal reading scores. They promote pedagogies that are “downright bizarre.” They should be circumvented with alternative routes that heavily emphasize content knowledge. Lisa Graham Keegan, in testimony before House Education Subcommittee.

State issues: –Community college pressure (different from last year—more 2 + 2) –State leadership calling for reduced course requirements in education and content (secondary) Challenges/threats

Degree of change (Garcia plan) (Arizona Republic, today) “ASU steps carefully but correctly in opening doors for teachers.” ASU “will abandon a few of the hurdles that ed schools across the nation have used for years to strangle the flow of teachers.” “Until now, if math majors wished to take enough education courses to qualify for state certification, they were required to jump through a complicated series of hoops...” “The well-insulated faculties of ed schools do not much like interference with their self-assigned ‘mission,’ which often pertains more to issues of ‘social justice’ and societal change than it does to teaching would-be teachers to teach.” “The changes proposed by ASU are good. The other public schools of education ought to follow suit.”

Challenges/threats Internal issues –Continued budgetary pressure –Enrollment declines (retention)

Get the story out Continue establishing statewide leadership in ed (service, Brown) Establish national presence Clarify college priorities Standing Council on College Priorities Technology Plan Task Force Enhance cross-campus relationships, particularly with Arts and Sciences, secondary ed Enhance my understanding and ability to position the college in issues related to the educational administrators Development activities (move to become more active in fund raising) Continue development of positive College environment Goals

Proposed Structure, Standing Council on College Priorities Note: This body recommends priorities to facultyThis body recommends priorities to faculty 4 faculty (elected representative from each department) 1 staff member (elected) 1 graduate student 1 undergraduate student 1 public school representative 1 department chair dean

Technology Plan Task Force CHARGE: To develop a plan (for SCCP) to inform decision making about the use of technology in the college. Chaired by representative from SCCP Representatives from each interested program area (e.g., elementary ed, educational technology, counseling, educational foundations, special ed) PT3 representative

Quality at COE

High Expectations Active Respect Tenacious Support COE Standard of Quality

High Expectations Active Respect Tenacious Support COE Standard of Quality HEARTS

1.What evidence do we have that the graduates of this program have learned what they need to know or be able to do? 2.What quality characteristics ought to be evident among all graduates of our program? 3.What barriers to quality are there? (e.g., policies, pressures, beliefs, resources) 4.What can we do this year to work for continuous improvement? WRITE DOWN THE NEXT STEPS WE SHOULD TAKE IN YOUR PROGRAM.