COE Dean's Blog

Dean's Office Update for faculty and staff

CAEP Writing Team Meeting

by

                                                                        CAEP Writing Team Meeting

March 2, 2018

11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.

Vandivort Hotel Boardroom

Minutes

 

In attendance:  David Hough, James Sottile, Russ Brock, Denise Cunningham, James Satterfield, Emmett Sawyer, Stephen Kleinsmith, Judy Gregg, Kim Dubree, Vicki Schmitt, Kim Finch, Rose Lee, Sharon Lopinot

 

Writing Assignments

Standard 1:  Denise Cunningham, Kimberly Stormer

Standard 2:  James Satterfield

Standard 3:  Judy Gregg

Standard 4:  David Hough

Standard 5:  James Sottile

Technology:  Emmett Sawyer

Diversity:  Gilbert Brown

 

CAEP Self-Study to be submitted via Accreditation Information Management System (AIMS): November 2018 (Due December 2018)

CAEP Onsite Visit:               November 3-5, 2019

 

Packets of information were provided to all, and Dean Hough demonstrated both electronically and with “hard copy” how the CAEP Self-Study will be uploaded into the AIMS template, explaining that while the final date of submission is in January 2019, we will begin submission in November 2018.  The maximum number of characters permitted for each text box in the electronic system was shown by Dean Hough, along with drafts of what Writing Team (WT) members have already sent to the Dean’s Office.  Dean Hough noted that information should not be placed into the AIMS text boxes at this time. He thanked WT members for their work, and each gave an update on their progress to date as follows:

 

Denise, Standard 1:  They are in good shape and included good examples.

James Satterfield, Standard 2:  They need to add more information to capture more partnerships, but they are off to a decent start.  They need more evidence such as MOUs and other documents as evidence. Dr. Gilbert Brown and Dr. Russ Brock have agreed to assist Dr. Satterfield. Dr. Brown could not attend today’s meeting, because he was taking faculty from China to Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar as part of the China program.

Judy, Standard 3:  She worked hard on getting close to the 30,000 characters and ended up with 31,500. She will continue to refine it.  She needs to work on labeling.  Judy did thank Kim Dubree and Karen Engler for helping her with information.  Dean Hough noted this is the most complete standard at this time.

David Hough, Standard 4:  He has over 34,400 characters and has just scratched the surface. He has a lot more to add and hasn’t started the advanced section yet, so he must figure out a way to edit the narrative to stay within the 30,000 character limit. Dr. Hough noted that he needs more technical reports and supporting evidence as mostly what he currently has are just numbers on pages. The Policy Briefs COE started supporting a few years ago are proving to be of great help. These will be included in the Appendices to the Standard 4 report. There was much discussion regarding the data collection projects Dr. Schmitt and Dr. Kleinsmith are conducting to provide evidence of completer impact on student learning a model for Standard 4. Dean Hough believes their study along with Sara Tipton’s study of the Internship Academy will make Standard 4 very strong.

James Sottile, Standard 5:  Areas to add are continuous improvement, chart validity/reliability, and equality assurance system. He needs to have good conversations regarding the selected area for improvement and feels like we are doing well with diversity.  The WT agreed that our area for future focus should be “creating a culture of assessment” in support of continuous improvement. We need to be careful how we approach this, however, because continuous improvement is the area we have chosen to have the CAEP site team examine. Dean Hough suggested hosting a series of luncheon meetings with program coordinators starting this month to address data issues, assessments, and reliability and validity of “home grown” instruments. The WT agreed, as did the Assessment Team members and department heads who met earlier at 10:00 AM.

Emmett Sawyer, Technology:  His report is more COE than EPP focused.  The shell is there.  Online course development is all COE.  The tables are good and need to be added to the appendix.  He is having a hard time finding instruments/data to show technology.  James Sottile told him this is addressed in the DESE matrices.  Some programs have technology embedded.  The dean will work with Emmet regarding what to put in the appendix.

Gilbert Brown, Diversity:  Gilbert was unable to attend as noted above. Dean Hough noted, however, that Dr. Brown had submitted a report several weeks prior to the WT’s self-imposed February 15th deadline.

 

Dean Hough said he will work to format the self-study.  A major task at some point in the process will be to cross reference other standards throughout with consistency and ensure appendices are not duplicated.

WT members reviewed and discussed options for editing, revising, rewriting, and reviewing self-study drafts.  After a discussion, everyone agreed to the following process:

  • The work group chairs will resubmit their sections to the Dean and Sharon using the template provided after meeting with Dean Hough one-on-one between March 5th and March 20th.
  • The Dean and his staff will re-assemble the report one section at a time, per the previous step.
  • The Dean’s Office will send an electronic file of the entire reformatted self-study to the WT by March 30th.
  • Each WT Standard chair will share the draft with her/his standard work group and lead rewriting / revision processes as appropriate , add information, clarify, edit, attach tables and appendices following their standard and insure character limits are not exceeded.
  • Each WT Standard chair will send revisions back to the Dean and Sharon by March 20th so they can have the next draft prepared by March 30, 2018. This will be repeated as necessary until September 2018. The back and forth process can go through summer.  They will work on finalizing the document from September through November.

Dean Hough likened the above WT Self-Study process to a “funnel” into which each writer adds bits and pieces that his office will incorporate into the report, maintaining one “voice” and format consistency.

 

Other comments:

  • Keri said it is good to have an open forum on the document before it is finalized for greater review.
  • Dean Hough and Judy Gregg and one or two others will work on finalizing the document after September 2018.
  • Russ will work with James and Gilbert on Standard 2 regarding partnerships.
  • The dean will have individual meetings scheduled with the people assigned to writing a standard. At these meetings Areas for Improvement (AFIs) will be examined, as sited from the last accreditation visit and copies of each Annual Report that addressed AFIs from 2013 to 2018 will be provided.  The Dean’s Office will provide at any time upon request a sample self-study from another IHE. The Dean noted that those he has seen make extensive use of cross-reference to other Standards and other sections of the report throughout.  Common names of projects, initiatives, reports, appendices, and other documents must be agreed to and used accurately throughout the report.
  • Appendices for each Standard and other sections in the report must be included at the end of each section and numbered sequentially, e.g., (1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 3.1., etc.)
  • Some confusion as to the language that should be used when cross-referencing was raised by Judy Gregg. After a couple different responses, Dean Hough noted he would find out for sure and let everyone know which language CAEP preferred be used.

WT members addressed organizational, communication, and inclusion issues related to the overall structure of the WT. Others recently added to the WT are Ximena, Daniel Hellman, and Karen Engler. A review of everyone’s calendars indicates that all but one or two WT members can meet on Friday mornings, because no one has classes on that day. Any other day/time would result in 5 to 7 WT members being unable to attend. As has always been our practice, the Dean’s Office will continue to schedule meetings as needed on days when the greatest number of people can attend. The Dean asked everyone to consider making future meetings a priority, even if some have to rearrange calendars as he, himself, often has to do.

 

The meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m.  The Dean will have Rose start scheduling the individual meetings with him starting next Wednesday.

 

Submitted by Sharon Lopinot, Executive Assistant