spanish-american institute
215 West
43 Street ● NYC, NY 10036
● 212.840.7111 ●
fax: 212.719.5922 ● www.sai2000.org ●
info@sai2000.org http://www.facebook.com/studentclub
CEA
Program Development,
Planning and Review
Standing Committee on
Faculty
To: Members,
Faculty Standing Program Development, Planning and Review Standards Committee
~ Jenny ARBAI
Responsible Parties:
- Caryn T. Davis, Dean of Academic Affairs
- Dr. Nori Panganiban, Intensive English Language Division, English Department Chair
- Freddie Ann Bush, Intensive English Language Division, Business Chair
- Melvin Marcus, Faculty Member
- Svetlana Shcheglova, Faculty Student-Services Associate
From: Dante
V. Ferraro, Program Development, Planning and Review Coordinator
Re: Charge to the Standing Committee
on Faculty
Date: May 3, 2013
cc: Other Standard Area Committees
All Faculty and Staff
The Faculty Standing Program Development, Planning and Review Standards Committee is responsible for the Faculty sections of the CEA Standards for the overall Program Development, Planning and Review process as well as for the Institute's response to CEA's October 2013 required Reports
The four sections below:
- summarize timelines for Committee work,
- review CEA’s Standards for this Committee,
- provide some initial guiding questions (prompts) for Committee development of its areas, and
- caption relevant sections of CEA's October 2013 Required Reports instructions
I. Tasks,
Process, Responsible Parties, Timelines, Documentation
and Assessment/Measurements
The Program Development, Planning and Review Plan established the following timelines for faculty Standing Committee activity:
|
Timelines |
Tasks -
Process - Responsible Parties |
Status |
Documentation
/ Measurement / Assessment |
|
April 2013 |
President Ferraro, Coordinator will invite Faculty Standing Committee members by personal meeting. Committee nominees will accept of decline the assignment orally. |
completed |
· Committee Charge Memo · TESOL Program Self-Review Instrument · School Catalog (vol 28 - before revision and vol 29 - after revision · Non-ESL Syllabi 2012 and 2013 revised · CEA October 2013 Reporting Requirements · CEA Standards · Committee Agendas · Committee Minutes · Surveys and Survey Results and Analysis · Terms of Employment for Teaching Staff · Terms of Employment for Administrators and Staff · TOEIC Memos, Support and Results |
|
May 2013 |
President Ferraro, Coordinator will develop and distribute the "Committee Charge" in consultation with Deans Davis, Schiffman and Schwenke. The first Standing Faculty Committee meeting will review assigned standards, discuss guiding questions, define needed documentation, and develop work plan. |
in process |
|
|
June 2013 |
Second Standing Faculty Committee Meeting will discuss draft of preliminary responses to overall Program Development, Planning and Review Plan as well as the proposed responses to CEA October 2013 Required Reports. Send draft responses to Coordinator no later than July 1, 2013 |
to be completed |
|
|
On or Before July
30, 2013 |
Dean Davis will summarize committee draft responses and submit to Dante V. Ferraro, Coordinator for final re-write. |
to
be completed |
|
|
October 1, 2013 |
President Ferraro, Coordinator, will assure submission of required CEA October 2013 Reports |
to
be completed |
|
|
December 2013 |
Standing Committee Responsible Parties (listed above) or their successors, will evaluate elements of the TESOL Self-Review Instrument, consider revisions, deletions and additions to Faculty components of the overall Program Planning, Development and Review strategy |
ongoing |
|
|
April 2014 |
This Standing Committee on Faculty (consisting of the responsible parties listed above or their successors) will repeat the Program Planning, Development and Review cycle of activities for Faculty described above. |
ongoing |
II.
CEA Standards: Faculty
The following Standards are
to be addressed by the Standing Faculty Committee with respect to the overall
Program Planning, Development and Review cycle and to some extent in the
October 2013 CEA Required Reports. Each
Standard below is followed by a brief summary, illustration, and/or excerpt
from CEA’s Discussion for that Standard and page references for further review
in the CEA Standards document.
CEA Standards must reinforce
and tie back to each other. For example,
there is a direct link between Curriculum, Student Achievement (Outcomes) and the faculty’s role in transforming course
objectives and course materials into useful student learning activities.
Faculty Standard 1:
Faculty members have education and training commensurate with their
teaching assignments. .
CEA Discussion: Where
faculty do not have degrees in ESL or a closely related field, CEA requires
that institutions demonstrate faculty demonstrate competency similar to that
possessed by those with formal degrees in language teaching in very specific
areas, including language teaching methodology, the structure of English, etc. (pp.
11-12).
Faculty Standard 2 : Faculty have
experience relevant of teaching students at the postsecondary level in their
areas of assignment and demonstrate an ongoing commitment to professional
development. [emphasis added].
CEA Discussion: See
the specific list of experiential and professional development criteria (p.13
and pp. 12-12).
Faculty Standard 3: Faculty who teach English demonstrate proficiency in
English. (p. 13).
Faculty Standard 4 : Teachers in training are appropriately
selected, trained, and supervised . . .
(p. 14).
Faculty Standard 5 : Faculty members each receive a job
description . . . [etc.], p. 14-15.
Faculty Standard 6 : The program or language institution has
an adequate number of faculty . . . [etc.,
p. 15-16.]
Faculty Standard 7 :
The program or language institution describes to faculty clearly and in
writing the performance criteria and procedures for evaluation at the onset of
the evaluation period, conducts faculty performance evaluations that are
systematic, regular, fair, objective, and relevant to achieving program or
institutional goals; and conveys evaluation results to faculty in writing in a
timely manner. .
CEA Discussion: See
pp. 16-17.
III. Some
Guiding Questions or Prompts for Committee Consideration
The Standing Faculty Committee
adds other questions for discussion as it wishes.
1.
Faculty Standards 1-3: How do
ESL-Plus faculty without formal degrees in ESL demonstrate competency in CEA’s
defined list of competencies on pp. 12-13?
Is this demonstration consistent with CEA’s criteria for language
faculty?
2.
Faculty Standards 1-3:
How do ESL-Plus faculty
demonstrate competency in English as well as its teaching? How
do ESL-Plus faculty demonstrate competency at the level at which they
are teaching?
3.
Faculty Standard 7: How does the Institute convey
its performance criteria to faculty? To
what extent are faculty aware in writing of faculty
performance expectations and criteria?
- Program Development, Planning and Review Standards 1 and 2: Does this year's Program Development, Planning and Review schedule include:
· Tasks
· Process
· Responsible Parties
· Timelines
· Documentation and
· Assessments and Measurements?
IV. Citations
from CEA October 2013 Required Reports To Be
Considered By The Standing on Faculty of the Program Planning, Development and
Review Plan
