Please update your web browser or disable Compatibility View.

Institutional Report for NCATE

III. Evidence

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 and facilitates professional development.

Element 1: Qualified Faculty

The Education Department faculty members are eminently qualified to teach the courses assigned to them by virtue of their earned doctorates or exceptional expertise.  Over 80% of Education courses are taught by faculty members who have earned doctorates.

The following chart identifies the academic credentials of our faculty from 1999-2000.  “Head count” refers to the number and percentage of faculty members holding each degree type.  “FTE” refers to the numbers and percentage of full-time equivalency for each degree type based upon the number of credit hours taught by faculty members.  “Student Credit Hours Produced” refers to the numbers of students taught multiplied by the number of credits hours earned by students in courses taught by faculty members of each degree type.  Note:  the numbers and percentages of faculty given in this table do not include clinical supervisors.  

Academic Qualifications of Faculty Members Who Teach Education Courses


Master's degree

Earned Doctorate








Faculty Headcount







Faculty FTE







Student Credit Hours Produced







All of the faculty members described above teach either foundations or pedagogy courses in the Education Department.  Of the 14 faculty members with a Master’s degree, 11 are concurrent master teachers in P-12 schools.  The other three are have strong teaching or clinical backgrounds in working with children/youth in the areas in which they teach.  For example, the instructor of the Drug Use and Abuse course is a youth counselor in a local drug rehabilitation center.

The faculty members described above who have doctorates all have a number of years of teaching experience in P-12 schools.  They also have contemporary professional experiences in school settings at the levels they supervise.  Examples from the past three years include such experiences as: 

  • working in and with several local schools as a science fair judge; 
  • working closely with the K-6 faculty in developing programs for teaching school wide theme days on China and Jerusalem;
  • working with P-12 practitioners and clinical students in New Orleans;
  • conducting faculty in-service workshops at various elementary schools in central Minnesota on the standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM);
  • conducting a series of in-service workshops on instructional uses of technology for the faculty of a partner school; 
  • developing collaborative projects on the Civil War and Medieval life with the 5th and 6th grade faculty and students of a partner school; 
  • working on a literacy research project with the faculty and students of an elementary school on an Indian reservation;
  • serving as consultants to the Site Improvement Council for a partner school;  
  • conducting a community survey for a local school district. 

The full-time professional education faculty members are also engaged in meaningful Teacher Education- and school- related scholarship.  Examples of current faculty scholarship can be seen in:

  • a website of Educational Resources and Lesson Plans;

  • a website on Lake Agassiz developed for Cybersafari;

  • an article about literacy published in Talking Points (April 2000);

  • book reviews published in Interdisciplinary Journal of Theology, Philosophy, History and Science;

  • program development for the Minnesota Department of Children, Families, and Learning, giving in-service training workshops to special education teachers throughout the state;

  • the Education Department Diversity Plan;

  • the Education Department Technology Plan;

  • the website developed for the Minnesota Science Licensure Framework;

  • working with the local mayor’s diversity initiative through consultation, documentation, and program assessment;

All clinical faculty are also highly qualified with academic preparation and successful teaching experience in the areas that they supervise.  School faculty all hold current teaching licenses and are recommended/approved by their principal for working with student teachers.  College supervisors hold teaching licenses (whether current or expired) at the levels they supervise.  In cases where the college supervisor does not have licensure in the specific field of a candidate’s student teaching experience, a college faculty member from that field also observes and evaluates the candidate’s use of content knowledge in teaching.   Clinical faculty members have letters of recommendation on file that recognize and support them as master teachers who are also recognized for their ability to work with candidates in P-12 settings.

Element 2: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching

All Education Department faculty members have an in-depth understanding of the fields in which they teach.  Certainly, initial academic qualifications merely set the stage for continued growth and development of faculty members.  Evidence beyond those academic qualifications that confirms the in-depth understandings of faculty members is present in a variety of formats, including the following:

  • consulting work done by faculty members;

  • the content and design of handbooks, learning tasks, and assessment instruments created by faculty members;

  • the development of course syllabi;

  • participation in professional development activities;

  • positions of leadership held within professional associations;

  • professional presentations;

  • published articles;

  • student evaluations of faculty performance.

Education Department faculty members are teacher-scholars who integrate what is known about their content fields, teaching, and learning into their own practice.  They:

  • read current literature about developments in their respective fields that they reference in their classes;

  • model uses of constructivist learning activities;

  • utilize standards based performance assessments;

  • utilize cooperative learning structures;

  • engage students in personal reflection about their own experiences and learning processes.

Education Department faculty members exhibit intellectual vitality in their sensitivity to critical issues.  While there are different critical issues in all subject areas, the Education Department as a whole recognizes diversity, technology, and assessment as critical issues for all educators.  These three critical issues are, therefore, imbedded and inter-woven throughout the Teacher Education Curriculum.  All full-time Education faculty members consider, and nearly all education courses address diversity, technology, and assessment as critical issues for education. The intellectual vitality and sensitivity of Education Department faculty members on these critical issues is evidenced by:

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in the Diversity Plan;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in Diversity training sessions;

  • syllabi documentation of diversity standard subsets of the Minnesota Standards of Effective Practice (SEP 3) as addressed in courses;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in the Technology Plan;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in technology training sessions;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in the workshop sessions about the Minnesota Graduation Rule;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty members in documenting appropriate assessment activities on syllabi for the SEP subsets;

  • the engagement of all full-time Education faculty in the Assessment Plan.

Education Department faculty members reflect the Teacher as Decision-Maker conceptual framework in their teaching. 

  • faculty members’ syllabi identify and reference the conceptual framework in the aims, purposes, and expected course outcomes;

  • faculty members and students are conversant about the conceptual framework;

  • performance-based assessments used by faculty members throughout the program reflect standard outcomes from the conceptual framework.

Education Department faculty members incorporate appropriate performance assessments in their courses.  Teacher Education Program Approval by the Minnesota Board of Teaching requires performance-based assessments for standards-based outcomes.

  • the Minnesota Board of Teaching approved the CSB/SJU Education Department’s delivery system for the Standards of Effective Practice with appropriate opportunities provided for all candidates to know, practice, and be assessed on each standard.

Education Department faculty members integrate diversity into coursework, field experiences and clinical practices of candidates.  Course syllabi document the integration of the Minnesota Board of Teaching’s diversity standard (SEP 3) into nearly all courses.  Examples of diversity integration include:

  • focusing on equity as a goal in addressing diversity;

  • focusing on identity issues related to gender and culture as well as sexual identity;

  • incorporating pedagogical strategies for addressing diverse learning needs related to linguistic diversity, cultural diversity, gender differences, and learning differences;

  • providing examples of multicultural teaching resources and materials;

  • references to artists from a variety of cultures;

  • using diversity related activities and assessments during student teaching;

  • using multicultural literature and literature that addresses diversity issues.

Education Department faculty members integrate technology into coursework, field experiences and clinical practices of candidates.  Examples of technology integration can be found in syllabi and include:

  • accessing and using resources from the Minnesota Curriculum Repository;

  • creating PowerPoint presentations;

  • developing a homepage website;

  • examining, working with, and evaluating a variety of software packages;

  • Internet searches;

  • student teaching technology requirements;

  • uses of digital and video technology;

  • uses of email and electronic discussions;

  • using an electronic portfolio.

Education Department faculty members value candidates’ learning and adjust their instruction appropriately to enhance candidates’ learning.  They utilize a variety of informal assessment techniques to determine the effectiveness of instructional strategies and make appropriate modifications to enhance student learning.  Examples of techniques used and modifications typically made include:

  • modifications in syllabi based upon candidate response to course evaluations;

  • providing opportunities and choices for candidates to work on learning tasks in groups or alone;

  • providing variety with respect for choices in learning tasks;

  • soliciting and listening to student concerns and following up with schedule adjustments.

Education Department faculty members understand assessment technology.  They utilize different technologies, including a variety of rubrics and checklists, which assess candidate learning and knowledge through performance in:

  • class discussion and activities;

  • class projects;

  • interviews;

  • making class presentations;

  • portfolios;

  • written papers.

Education Department faculty members use multiple forms of assessment in determining their own effectiveness.  Examples of assessment forms utilized include:

  • class observations by colleagues;

  • course evaluations;

  • evaluations of student performance.

Education Department faculty members use data from these assessments to improve their own practice.  In preparation for their annual reviews, faculty members:

  • analyze their own course evaluations;

  • reflect upon the implications of their analysis;

  • plan for professional development to improve practice.

Candidates and peers across campus and in P-12 schools recognize Education Department faculty members as outstanding teachers.  Examples of such recognition include:

  • Dr. Dee Lamb was named the first recipient of the Sister Mary Grell Teacher of Distinction Award in 1995.

  • S. Lois Wedl was honored as the outstanding teacher and mentor at the 1999 Senior Banquet.

  • invitations by other institutions for some faculty members to teach summer courses;

  • letters of recommendation written by colleagues within the department as well as from other departments and P-12 educators;

  • course evaluations.

Element 3: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship

Education Department faculty members demonstrate scholarly work related to teaching, learning, and their fields of specialization.  All faculty members document their individual scholarship endeavors on their vitae.  In addition,

  • for the past three years, the Education Department faculty members have been immersed in the scholarship of standards-based teaching and performance assessment of learning in relation to the Minnesota Graduation Rule, INTASC, and now, the Minnesota Standards of Effective Practice.  This scholarship can be seen in course syllabi and standard alignment, and has resulted in changes in the ways faculty members teach, the kinds of learning candidates do, and the processes for documenting candidates’ learning. 

  • Education Department faculty members have been learning about and experimenting with incorporating new digital technologies into their respective courses.

  • Education Department faculty members have constructed a knowledge-base for the program outcomes (the Standards of Effective Practice) of the conceptual framework, “Teacher as Decision-Maker.”

Element 4: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service

Education Department faculty members are actively engaged in dialogues about the design and delivery of instructional programs in both professional education and P-12 schools.

  • While informal and spontaneous discussions about instructional programs occur regularly between colleagues, formal dialogues about Teacher Education that engage all full-time departmental faculty members occur in regularly scheduled meetings of the Teacher Education Committee.

  • Education Department faculty members who teach pedagogy courses regularly meet with P-12 educators in partner schools and to dialogue about instructional issues connecting the professional education program and P-12 schools.

  • Through the Teacher Education Advisory Committee (TEAC), Education Department faculty members dialogue with colleagues in other disciplines as well as P-12 educators about instructional issues in Teacher Education.

Education Department faculty members work in P-12 schools with teachers as colleagues.  Examples of such work include:

  • Ms. Sandy Bot-Miller serves with teachers as a member of the Site Council at both North Junior High and Apollo High Schools in St. Cloud.  She recently served with teachers on the St. Cloud District 742’s Decision-Making Committee for implementing the Minnesota Grad Rule Profiles of Learning.  She also served with teachers on the District’s Communications Improvement Committee as well as on hiring committees for Principal and Assistant Principal positions at Apollo High School. 

  • Dr. Dee Lamb worked with the 5th and 6th grade teachers at the Lab School to develop collaborative projects on the Civil War and Medieval life. 

  • Dr. Art Spring worked with the faculty of the Lab School to develop and teach school-wide theme days on China and Jerusalem. 

  • Dr. Janne Lillestøl and Br. Doug Mullin both taught and worked with teachers at St. Louis Cathedral School in New Orleans in the past three years. 

  • Dr. David Leitzman and Dr. Ed Sass both worked with teachers on the Site Improvement Council for South Junior High School.

Element 5: Collaboration

Education Department faculty members provide leadership in the profession, schools and professional associations.  All faculty members have current and active affiliations with various professional associations.   Leadership positions that have been held by Education Department faculty members include:

  • Dr. Jo Evans-Coleman:  American Association of Black Women in Higher Education (Vice-president of Minnesota Chapter);  Association of University Women International Committee (Vice Chair)

  • Ms. Melisa Dick:   Delta Kappa Gamma (Vice-president)

  • Dr. Bruce Dickau:  Minnesota Science Teachers Association (Board member)

  • Dr. Don Hoodecheck:  Minnesota Human Relations Association (Vice-president)

  • Ms. Marian Johnson:  St. Cloud School District 742 (Math Instructional Leader)

  • Br. Doug Mullin:  St. John’s Abbey (Subprior and member of the Senior Council for the religious community sponsoring St. John’s University)

  • S. Lois Wedl:  Association of Adult Development and Aging (Board member)

Education Department faculty members are engaged as a community of learners regarding the conceptual framework and scholarship of the classroom.

  • Many Teacher Education Committee meetings over the past two years have been devoted to creating and refining the conceptual framework.  These meetings have included presentations, small group work, discussions, and consensus building.  Most full time faculty members attend most of the meetings.

  • The Teacher Education Advisory Committee has also discussed the conceptual framework and helped to refine thinking about it.

  • Education Department faculty members collaborated in aligning their syllabi to the Standards of Effective Practice in preparation for program review by the Minnesota Board of Teaching.

  • Education Department faculty members collaborated in constructing the knowledge-base for the conceptual framework during the summer and fall of 2000.

Education Department faculty members develop relationships, programs, and projects with colleagues in P-12 schools and faculty in other units of the institution to develop and refine knowledge bases, conduct research, make presentations, publish materials, and improve the quality of education for all students.

  • Through partnership programs between the Education Department and P-12 schools, faculty members from both settings have developed relationships of mutual respect and support.

  • Faculty members from P-12 and the Education Department share resources and expertise in the context of planning clinical and field experiences. 

  • Collaborative relationships are ongoing between members of the Education Department, the Social Work Department, the Peace Studies Department, and Fast Forward.  There is currently an ad hoc committee with representatives from each of these departments that is working to develop a program to support children/youth at risk in area P-12 schools.

  • A collaborative relationship is ongoing between the Education Department and the Office of Service Learning.

  • Examples of faculty collaborations on projects over the past three years include:

    • Ms. Sandy Bot-Miller’s with Gallery of St. Cloud and CSB Campus Ministry in setting up art-exhibits;

    • Dr. Bruce Dickau’s collaboration with faculty members from the CSB/SJU Chemistry Department to develop and hold summer workshops for chemistry teachers around the state;

    • Dr. Dee Lamb’s collaboration with the Education Office of the Diocese of St. Cloud in presenting workshop sessions for regional Catholic School teachers;

    • Dr. Janne Lillestøl and Dr. Art Spring’s collaboration with CSB/SJU IT Services on Collaboratorium IV;

    • Dr. David Leitzman’s collaboration with the Planning Office of the Diocese of St. Cloud in strategic planning;

    • Br. Doug Mullin’s collaboration with the CSB/SJU Math Department in a MMM3 workshop;

    • Dr. Art Spring’s collaboration with CSB Elderhostel.

Element 6: Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance

The Education Department’s systematic and comprehensive evaluation system includes regular and comprehensive reviews of the professional education faculty’s teaching, scholarship, service, collaboration with the professional community, and leadership in the institution and profession.

  • The department chair and tenured faculty members observe all full-time, non-tenured colleagues teaching each semester.  A review of each observation is given to the non-tenured faculty member.

  • The department chair and tenured faculty members observe and evaluate the teaching of colleagues who apply for promotion.

  • All full-time faculty members are expected to survey student perceptions about their courses and teaching effectiveness.

  • All full-time faculty members are asked to complete a self-evaluation form at the end of each year.  The self-evaluation (revised in 2001) addresses teaching, advising, service/leadership, and professional development.

  • All full-time faculty members are asked to review their self-evaluation with the department chair at the end of each year and identify goals for the following year.

Element 7: Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

The Education Department has policies and practices that encourage all professional education faculty to be continuous learners.  Experienced Education Department faculty members mentor new members, providing encouragement and support for developing scholarly work around teaching, inquiry, and service.

  • An individual plan for professional development is addressed with each faculty member annually.

  • Each year the colleges provide $500 in professional development travel funds to each full-time faculty member.  These funds may accumulate to be used for national or international professional development opportunities.

  • Faculty members are encouraged to apply for additional professional development grants that are awarded by the Faculty Research and Development Committee or the Learning Enhancement Service.

  • All tenured members of the Education Department have had a professional development sabbatical in the past two years or will have completed one by the end of next year.

  • All new faculty members are offered official mentors from both within the Education Department as well as from colleagues outside the department.

  • The Office of Learning Enhancement Services provides a variety of opportunities to meet with colleagues from different disciplines to address pedagogical issues.

  • A culture of collegiality characterizes the Education Department that encourages faculty members to work with, share with, and learn from each other.