Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
APPENDIX E University Statements of Policy Regarding Recognition of Faculty Contributions to Professional-Development Programs UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE COMMITTEE ON PRECOLLEGE EDUCATION To ensure that precollege education could become recognized as part of a faculty member's ongoing teaching responsibility, the Academic Senate at the University of California, Irvine, established a Committee on Community Educa- tion in 1985, which has the following charge: Committee for Community Education (A) Membership (1) The Committee for Community Education shall consist of ten divi- sion members, appointed by the Committee on committees for three- year terms, and ax-officio, the Chair of the Department of Teacher Edu- cation, the Director of the Office of Relations with Schools, and the Dean University Extension. (2) There shall be one member from each department and program offering instruction in subject matter taught in the public schools, i.e., biology, chemistry, computer science, English, fine arts, foreign lan- guages, history, mathematics, physics, and social sciences. (B) Duties (1) To recommend to the Academic Senate and to the university admin- istration proposals to assure faculty awareness of the university's cur- rent and potential relations and involvement with K-14 education. 204
UNIVERSITY STATEMENTS OF POLICY 205 (2) To examine the possibility of the re-institution of Master of Arts in Teaching programs supervised by the university faculty and to develop other programs to assure effective continuing education of school per- sonnel and to promote curriculum and instructional research and devel- opment. (3) To explore the possibility of the university administration's creat- ing an office for community education to implement the above. (4) To review reports and recommendations intended to improve the quality of education at all levels; and to recommend appropriate actions that would involve the university faculty and administration. UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATION OF FACULTY MEMBERS WHO PLAY A SUBSTANTIAL ROLE IN PRE-COLLEGE MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION (Adopted by the Faculty of Science 7123192) Although there has been substantial support within several Faculty of Sci- ence departments for involving competent mathematicians and scientists in pre- college education, the promotion and tenure committees and peer review com- mittees of some of those departments have expressed frustration when trying to evaluate faculty who have been significantly involved with pre-college education activities. The following procedures and the accompanying criteria are meant both to assure high quality scholarship and to assure faculty who choose to participate in such activities that they will be evaluated in an appropriate manner. No faculty member will be evaluated using these procedures without a written agreement between the faculty member and the department head. We urge de- partment heads to consult with their entire faculty before reaching such agree- ments. The procedures and criteria are written broadly enough so that some faculty whose primary appointment is in the College of Education may appropriately be evaluated by them. · A written agreement should be reached between each individual faculty member and his or her department head as to what percent of the faculty member' s time is to be spent on pre-college mathematics or science education. · When the percent agreed to in item 1 is greater than 0, and the faculty member wishes to be evaluated by the Science Education Promotion and Tenure Committee (SEPTC), appropriate papers should be submitted to SEPTC concur- rently with or previous to submission of such papers to the Departmental evalua- tion committee. The percent agreed to in item 1 should also be communicated to SEPTC. . SEPTC will solicit evaluations from appropriate outside and inside refer
206 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE TEACHERS ees. These must include scholars in the appropriate content who have an interest in education, and distinguished educators who have an interest in the appropriate content. · Before making a formal report, SEPTC will meet with the faculty mem- ber to advise him or her about SEPTC's preliminary evaluation and to consult with the faculty member about possible further information and alternative ac- tions. · SEPTC will evaluate all materials and send them, with SEPTC' s recom- mendation, to the appropriate department head and evaluation committee. SEPTC's report will become part of the permanent record. UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF FACULTY MEMBERS WHO PLAY A SUBSTANTIAL ROLE IN PRE-COLLEGE MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION Introduction The purpose of mathematics and science education is to improve the teach- ing and learning of mathematics and science. Evaluation of faculty members who play a substantial role in mathematics and science education should take into account the impact they have, and are having, and are likely to have, on the teaching and learning of mathematics and science. Both the magnitude of the impact and its direction should be considered. Written evaluations by distinguished colleagues and others, both within and without the University, will necessarily play an important role in determining the magnitude and the quality of a professor's impact. Efforts that will be evaluated for science and mathematics education should be directed towards the systematic improvement of science and mathematics education beyond the faculty member' s own classroom and advising activities. Examples of such efforts might include: scholarly works that made a contribution to teaching and learning, innovative textbooks that substantially impact on teaching and learning, leadership in ser- vice activities, etc., but in all cases, the magnitude and quality of the impact is the essential issue. Further evidence of achievement may come from initiation and development of education programs, from obtaining and managing grant support, from service on advisory and policy boards that have substantial influence, and other similar activities. Traditional categories (research, teaching, service) may be inappropriate for evaluating science and mathematics educators because the lines between the categories are often blurred. If these categories are to be used, however, caution must be exercised to avoid assigning creative scholarly work to the service or teaching category (where it ordinarily receives less weight in the overall process) simply because it is different from traditional research.
UNIVERSITY STATEMENTS OF POLICY Research or Its Creative Equivalent 207 The University of Arizona Faculty of Science Guidelines for Judging Stature and Excellence in Research includes the following statements: "Excellence in research means, among other things, performance that earns international stature." "In evaluating research, Standing Committees should look especially for publi cations and other efforts that reflect existing or developing international stature, e.g., refereed publications, invitations to substantial conferences, grants and awards." The criteria are appropriate for mathematics and science education, but some of the specifics may differ from more conventional evaluations within the Faculty of Science. Worthy contributions could include scholarly books that make a significant contribution, textbooks that are substantially different from, and better than, pre- vious textbooks (if any) on a worthy subject, articles in refereed respected jour- nals that describe and advocate better practice or that present research results relating to learning science or mathematics, improved methods and instruments for evaluation, computer software, movie or television productions that enhance education, and so on. No one person, of course, will make contributions in all of these ways, but any of these activities, and many similar ones, should be thought of as legitimate research or creative activities. The quality and impact of the work must be seen as the important issues. Evaluation committees must, of necessity, consider with some care the ac- tual origin of materials. If a textbook, for example, was designed and largely developed by employees of the publishing company, the "author" should receive little credit for it. If co-authored articles or books were written largely by the other authors, that fact should be considered. In situations where possibilities of this sort exist, the evaluation committee has an obligation to establish the nature and magnitude of the faculty member' s contribution. Service The University of Arizona Faculty of Science Guidelines for Judging Stature and Excellence say that: "Service . . . must be of such a character as to add to the professional reputation of the faculty member and of the University at the local, national, and international level." Because a major goal of university mathemat- ics and science education is to improve teaching and learning in the schools, service is of greater importance than for most members of the Faculty of Science. It may include service to professional organizations, to government and other agencies, to the University, to the College, to the Department, to local schools,
208 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE TEACHERS etc. It may also include speeches and workshops at professional meetings, and similar activities. There may appear to be some overlap between "research or its creative equivalent" and "service" as used here. Many of the opportunities to provide service on a national or international level may be indicators of a distinguished reputation, and therefore of high quality research and creativity. However, speak- ing, service, etc., should not be taken as ipso facto evidence of research and creativity. The research and other contributions must be considered directly, and the opportunities for service taken as only one indicator of the quality of that research and creative contribution. Teaching The University of Arizona Faculty of Science Guidelines for Judging Stature and Excellence in Teaching say that: "In order for the University's commitment to quality teaching to be a practical reality, it is essential that teaching quality be evaluated, recognized and rewarded.... It is the responsibility of departments to devise evaluation procedures and to collect systematic information on teaching performance. As a minimum, student evaluations, peer evaluations, measures of student learning, and evaluations by department heads are required." In addition to the normal faculty teaching responsibilities, special consider- ation will be given to the development of new and innovative courses, and to the creation of new courseware or laboratory activities that substantially enhance existing teaching practice. Unusually strong commitment to student advising (such as being Faculty Fellow) should be taken into account. It is appropriate to consider the career outcomes of former students, and to solicit their evaluations of the faculty member. It is also important to recognize and evaluate activities that impact the qual- ity of science and mathematics teaching in the schools. This includes inservice training of teachers, and the development of courses or materials that substan- tially benefit instruction in the schools.