Present: C. Hunter, E. Marzluff, J. Meehan, R. Osgood, S. Rebelsky, T. Roberts, J. Swartz, E. Willis.

 

The meeting came to order at 4:45 p.m. in room 226 of the Joe Rosenfield Center. The minutes and excerpts of 5-9-07 and 5-17-07 were approved.

 

President’s Remarks

 

None.

 

Dean’s Remarks

 

The Dean announced that John Ottenhoff, currently serving as Associate Provost at Alma College, has been named Vice President of the Associated Colleges of the Midwest.

 

He updated Council on the status of faculty searches.

 

Dean distributed draft guidelines for handling term faculty position interviews and invited Council members’ comments. According to these guidelines, one-year term interviewees could meet with an Associate Dean rather than a Council member as the extra-departmental faculty interviewer. The Associate Dean would meet with the candidate early during the visit and notify the search chair if any concerns emerged during the conversation.

 

He also distributed template draft for tenure-track (regular and special) searches. There was discussion of whether transcripts will be required and decided that they would not but that degree verification will be required by College in all cases.

 

Council Remarks

 

E. Marzluff asked the President to speak about the agenda for the upcoming Board of Trustees retreat. He reported that the Board has a new Chair and two new Vice Chairs and that the main goal is socialization. Marzluff asked specifically if a capital campaign were on their agenda. The President said that it was not, but such a discussion may be taken up next year. C. Hunter asked for Council involvement with the Board in such a further conversation.

 

E. Willis noted that she and Jean Ketter had worked to produce a response to a memorandum from the Teacher Education Committee voicing concern over decisions made regarding elementary certification. The body of the letter of response follows.

 

May 23, 2007

 

To:   Carmen Valentin, Chair—Teacher Education Committee

 

From:   Executive Council and the Department of Education

 

Re:   Staffing and Curricular Changes in the Department of Education

 

 

Your request for information about the process of recent staffing and curricular changes in the Education program has prompted the Executive Council and the Department of Education to compose this joint response for the committee’s use. We offer a brief history of decisions leading up to the current suspension of the elementary certification program. In this joint document we have tried to capture the different perspectives of the department and the Executive Council (2005-2006) on key aspects of the decision process we followed. We also comment on our understanding of the governance issues that have been raised by this decision process.

 

History of Recent Position Proposals, 2002-2006

 

In the spring of 2002, the department submitted a proposal to undertake a tenure-track search in elementary education to replace an elementary education faculty member who was leaving (due to not completing a dissertation). That proposal was not recommended by Executive Council (2001-2002). Because the department was approaching the timing for its next 10-year external review, Executive Council recommended instead that the department first conduct this review and then return with a position proposal. The department was given permission to hire a term replacement for 2002-2004.

 

The external review committee visited campus in Fall 2002 and issued its report soon thereafter. While applauding the department’s success in certifying student teachers and many other aspects of the program, the external reviewers suggested department faculty were expending great energy on a few students and that they were not serving the general student population of Grinnell as much as they might. The reviewers also recommended that the department consider collaborating with other institutions to assist students in completing the certification process. Finally, the reviewers recommended that the department work with a consultant to create a proposal that would answer these and other concerns expressed in the review.

 

The department worked for several weeks with a consultant during the spring of 2003 to craft a proposal, which it then submitted to Executive Council (2002-2003). The proposal offered two alternatives: One entailed eliminating all certification at Grinnell and coordinating with the University of Iowa so students could complete a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) in a fifth year. The second alternative outlined a continuation of the program largely as it was but with the addition of several 200-level classes that would serve more of the general population of Grinnell’s students. It also redesigned and opened the 300-level methods courses to non-licensure seeking students. In its proposal, the department indicated a strong preference for the second alternative because of a long-standing commitment to licensure as a part of the department’s program and because it built on the expertise of the department faculty at that time. The Executive Council approved this proposal to continue with the second alternative. The department undertook a search in 2004 that lead to the appointment of a specialist in elementary literacy.

 

In keeping with the accepted proposal, the department began implementing its plan to create four 200 level courses to replace the one course previously offered. The department has already established two of these 200 level courses and has been given division approval to add two more. According to the department’s plan, it will add a course focusing on the nature of science and science education next year and a fourth 200-level course focusing on issues of English as a Second Language/Bilingual education in 2008. These newly created 200-level courses have had relatively good enrollments over the past couple of years. Opening up of 300-level courses has not resulted in large increases in enrollment, but it has attracted more non-licensure seeking students to them, particularly to the secondary foreign language methods and science methods courses. An increase from one to six (in Foreign Language Methods) and one to three (in Science Methods), may be small in absolute numbers, is proportionally a large increase.

 

Last April the Education Department submitted a proposal to replace Martha Voyles (who had submitted an application for Senior Faculty Status). The job description’s primary emphasis was on elementary certification.  Though it stated a preference for an applicant who could teach elementary science and math methods courses, it indicated that applicants with experience at the secondary level would be given special consideration. It was the department’s hope that it would be able to continue certifying teachers in secondary math and science education either by appointing someone to the position who was able to stretch to teaching secondary science and/or math, or by hiring temporary faculty to teach the methods courses when needed. In view of the department’s small size and its faculty’s strengths, department faculty decided to emphasize elementary for the tenure-track position for two reasons. First, the department valued the expertise of its specialist in elementary literacy and wished to ensure her continued participation in the certification program. A failure to hire someone who could offer courses in elementary math and science methods would require the suspension or cancellation of the elementary certification program in which much of her teaching had been concentrated. Second, the department believed the choice was justified based on enrollments: From 2000-2004, the department had licensed 17 elementary student teachers versus 14 in secondary math and secondary science combined.

 

The Executive Council (2005-2006) chose not to recommend the department’s April proposal. Three concerns informed this decision. First, to Council, the department’s proposal seemed likely to result in the elimination of secondary math and science education certification. This did not seem desirable in view of what the Council and administration perceived as a strategic local and national interest in secondary math and science education. In this regard, Council was aware of the emphasis on science education as articulated in the Strategy 6 implementation document and some members of Council found this a significant factor.Second, referring to the 2002 external review, Council members believed that the department, despite recent changes in its curriculum, continued to be stretched too thin by supporting both elementary and secondary education. The Council also weighed comments by the Dean and the President indicating that some liberal arts colleges, in the face of similar problems, have abandoned certification and offer instead an education studies program. At these programs, students seeking certification then do so in a graduate program, typically at another institution. While Council members supported the College’s commitment to certification, they did not see how the department could sustain its efforts to certify students at both the elementary and secondary levels. Finally, Council also discussed the fact that no students had registered for student teaching at the elementary level in 2005 and 2006, which raised questions for them about the viability of the elementary certification program.(1)

 

The President and Dean supported Council’s recommendation, and did not see any conflicts for current staff within the department.

 

Because Council’s response raised many issues, and because Jean Ketter had a leave planned for 2006-7, Council also approved a two-year replacement for Martha Voyles, so that the department would have ample time to consider these suggestions, to reflect on possible directions for the program, to make connections on campus, and to otherwise ensure that the next proposal would be as strong as possible.

 

Though the department did not agree with Executive Council’s analysis of the fragility of the elementary program, it chose to use a much shorter time frame and submitted a proposal at the end of the summer of 2006 for a search to begin immediately. The department decided to move forward with a proposal to hire a tenure-track faculty member for two reasons. First, department members preferred not to destabilize the department again by creating another two-year wait for an elementary tenure-track faculty member since it believed that the previous wait had had a negative impact on enrollment, particularly in the elementary program (see footnote below). Second, and more importantly, the department understood that the Council’s rejection of the initial proposal meant that a proposal aimed at continuing with elementary certification would be unlikely to succeed. This conclusion was confirmed by individual conversations Jean Ketter had with Dean Swartz, Wayne Moyer and other members of the Executive Council in June 2006. In her meeting with Swartz and Moyer, Ketter was encouraged to focus on Strategy 6 as a rationale for emphasizing science education in the subsequent proposal. In meetings with remaining Council members, faculty encouraged the department to focus on its relationship to the College’s overall strategic plan and expressed their view that eliminating elementary education would help focus the education program in an area (science) that would enhance the department’s presence on campus and the College’s presence nationally. Thus, the department opted not to wait to resubmit a new proposal. Although the second proposal submitted in August of 2006 represented a clear departmental consensus, it should not be interpreted as an abandonment of the department’s strong commitment to elementary certification. The department would have preferred to continue offering both elementary and secondary certification if staffing had permitted it to do so.

 

The Council (2006-2007) perceived the second proposal to be strong and in keeping with the strategic goals of the College. The proposal addressed the issues that the prior Council had raised about the first proposal: it committed the department to a focus on secondary education with particular emphases on math and science and a new emphasis on ESL, it proposed ties to other departments on campus, and it eliminated the elementary education program. But it also suggested a new direction for the department that would serve a wider range of students, including those not immediately planning on certification, and it gave a roadmap that could lead to an interdisciplinary major in Education Studies.(2)

 

The search for Martha’s replacement proceeded and identified some excellent candidates. During the process of the search Executive Council members heard that there might be some differences of opinion in the department about the new direction of the department. A subcommittee of the Executive Council met with the entire department. Department members indicated that they would like, at some time, to reintroduce the elementary certification program, but acknowledged that this might require an additional faculty position or other additional investments by the College in the department. The Dean, the President and the Chair of the Faculty met with each faculty member who was continuing in the department and each department member assured the President, Dean and Faculty Chair of strong support for the search and the new direction. During those meetings, however, department members articulated their continuing desire to support elementary education certification and expressed the hope that this would be possible in the future.

 

Following these discussions, the tenure-track search continued and the College ultimately offered the position to a strong candidate who specializes in secondary math and science education.

 

Current staffing will not allow the department to continue the elementary certification program. The approved proposal required appointing a secondary science and math education scholar and a reconfiguring of the curriculum to develop the ESL/Bilingual focus. The department is fortunate that its elementary specialist has the expertise to lead the development of the ESL/Bilingual certification program. The dean and the department are discussing what the College can do to support department faculty during this transitional period.

 

Responsibilities toward the Teacher Education Committee and the Grinnell Faculty

 

In recent weeks both members of the Department of Education and the Executive Council have recognized that the Teacher Education Committee should have been consulted about decisions affecting the certification program. The TEC’s responsibility for making such recommendations is clearly stated in the Faculty Handbook. Proper procedure probably required the Department of Education to discuss staffing proposals that had implications for certification with the TEC before submitting them to council for its consideration. The department now recognizes that its failure to do so was an unintentional oversight for which it has already apologized. Members of the Executive Council were not aware of the committee’s prerogative in this regard or they would have sent the proposals back to the TEC for its recommendation. Both the department and the Executive Council accept that they should have been more diligent in ensuring that such consultation had occurred.

-----------------------------------------

(1) While it is true that in 2005 and 2006 the department did not have any elementary student teachers, there were students enrolled in the elementary program planning to student teach. Next year, there will be two elementary student teachers and the year thereafter, three intend to pursue elementary certification. These numbers show a slight attrition from the original figures provided to Executive Council in the first proposal but does show an upward trend from no elementary student teachers. In its original proposal, the department stressed that the drop in elementary student teachers mirrored a two-year lull during the years of the outside review and consultation during which the department was allowed to hire only temporary people. From the department’s perspective, the two years after it hired its elementary specialist did not provide enough time to consider yet again the value of the elementary education program or to allow a growth trend. Moreover, the department was not aware that the elementary program was under scrutiny because the previous Executive Council in 2003 had endorsed the plan to support elementary education by hiring an elementary education scholar. Since no Council members who had approved the 2003 proposal remained on Council in spring 2006, Council did not know nor was it provided this context.

 

(2) In his note to the department indicating acceptance, Dean Swartz cautioned that the Council’s approval was a limited endorsement since the proposal was so far reaching in scope.

 

“We want to point out that this ([recommendation of the proposal]) does not involve an endorsement of all aspects of the proposal, including developing all the new things mentioned, as far more work would need to be done before we could see our way clear for such approval. In fact, the general reaction was that the proposal continued for more things than could be done with the anticipated staffing, and that the department would have to be careful not to overextend itself.” (Email from Dean Swartz on 9/18/2006)

 

Because the dean’s note indicated that the entire proposal was not accepted, the department is uncertain about what its next steps should be in implementing those aspects of the proposal that involve more than hiring the science/math person or developing an ESL/Bilingual program. More discussions will need to occur between the department and the administration about the future directions of the department.

 

end of letter

 

Faculty Position Proposals

 

Council conducted a final review of a letter to be sent to departments in response to their position proposals. Council expressed the view that all members of the proposing departments should see the Council response.

 

Search Committees for Gender and Women’s Studies and Film History

 

Council discussed the preferred composition of faculty who could carry out the tenure-track searches in Gender and Women’s Studies and Film History. The Dean will contact these people regarding their willingness to serve.

 

EKI Advisory Board

 

Council discussed issues involved in the selection process for membership on the EKI Advisory Board including the appearance of dominance in the case of successive appointments from the same department, need for overlap and assuring institutional memory. It was decided that the Director of the Office of Interdisciplinary Studies should, in future years, call for expressions of interest following the procedures used by the Centers.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.

 

Secretary

Karen Wiese