Appendix 2.2

Report of an Accreditation Visit made to

the Education Faculty of

Deniz University

to review the programs in

Classroom Teaching

Primary Mathematics Education*

English Language Education*

Secondary Chemistry Education*

Art Education*

*(Material not included in this sample report)

October 24-26, 2000

Members of the Team

            Prof Dr Oğuz Kaya, Piri Reis University, Team Leader

            Prof Dr Koray Alkan, Doğu University

            Prof Dr Eray Özkan, Güneydoğu University

            Prof Dr Yeşim Tüz, Batı University

            Doç Dr Mustafa Uysal, Güney University

            Doç Dr Deniz Tan, Kuzey University

            Doç Dr Figen Öz, Kuzeybatı University

This report is a confidential document based on an accreditation visit to Deniz University.  The findings and judgements are made in good faith by members of the team.   The report is given to the faculty and to YÖK for the purposes of reviewing the named programs for accreditation.
Report on classroom teaching  program

Introduction   

Deniz University was started in 1982 as a regional university designed principally to serve the city and surrounding area. Growing quickly to its current enrolment of 25,450 students, the University now offers programs from bachelors degrees through the PhD in several fields of study.  The University’s strengths are its programs in business management and engineering.

The education staff at Deniz University includes 51 faculty staff, 12 lecturers, 15 research assistants, and 10 support staff members.  The faculty offers programs in classroom teaching, English, art, primary mathematics, secondary physics and chemistry.  A total of 852 students are enrolled, of whom 812 are in programs to prepare beginning teachers.   Currently no evening programs are offered.

The faculty is housed in a modern building completed in 1993.  The building includes classrooms, seminar and meeting rooms, offices, computer laboratories, science laboratories, and art studios.  There is also a faculty library which houses a collection of books and journals (mainly donated by faculty staff) along with textbooks and teaching materials useful to the classroom teachers.  Overall, the facility works well, except for some continuing ventilation problems in the art studios.

The student body has increased by 50% over the past 5 years.  The program in classroom teaching was added in 1993, and altogether it enrols nearly half of the students in education.  About half the students come from the local city.  Most of the others live in dormitories provided by the University.  

In addition to the degree programs, the staff are active in the area of instructional technology.  Several staff have published in this area, and the work with partner schools has a particular focus on the uses of instructional technology in the classroom.  Teachers in partner schools are offered workshops on using software programs related to their subject specialties as part of the partner school agreement.

Profile

Classroom Teaching

Standard Domain 1:   Planning, implementation and evaluation of the program

The program to prepare classroom teachers follows the curriculum specified by YÖK.   For each course, the staff have developed a chart which shows how the work in the classes follows the prescribed curriculum.  The number of hours of theory and practice are followed for each course.  The staff are hoping to increase the  number of practice hours in partner schools.  

Course outlines are complete and display a variety of different teaching and learning activities for the various objectives.  Particularly in the areas of English, music, art, and social studies, students are actively engaged with instructional technology in many of their courses.  Faculty staff in Turkish, mathematics, and science indicate that incorporating more instructional technology into the courses is a priority for the next two years.

Course outlines are carefully sequenced.  Records of the curriculum committee document the work staff have done to ensure that students in the new program will have sufficient opportunity to practise the skills needed by beginning teachers.  In general, staff and students welcome the development of partner schools as a way of ensuring that students have more time to practise their skills.  Several students in their fourth year (the old program) said that while their overall experience had been good, they wished they had more practice time in schools.

The faculty have also begun to develop an assessment plan which will vary the assessment methods used.  Currently, assessment relies quite heavily on written papers with a few instances of students constructing materials to be used in schools.  Often, however, students are not able to test these materials with children in classrooms, though the feedback from the faculty staff is quite thorough.  The partner school coordinator for the classroom teaching program is working with school liaison partners to ensure appropriate involvement of teachers in assessment.  Thus, while the assessment plan is not complete, the faculty staff are doing a good job of developing the plan, including relating the assessment to course objectives and ensuring involvement of partner schools.

Course materials are orderly and thorough.  Faculty staff and students are articulate about the purpose of each course, its objectives, and the class methods selected to achieve the objectives.  Staff are generally clear about the overall design of the curriculum.  However, not all students understand the purpose of each course and how it fits into the overall design.  Many first and second year students were not able to explain the purpose of the educational science classes and how they helped in the formation of a beginning teacher.

Lessons presented by the faculty staff were well organized and demonstrated a variety of teaching methods.  In most classes observed by the team, students were actively involved during at least part of the class session.  Classes observed in the partner schools were similarly well presented.  The classes were orderly.  The level of pupil involvement in these classes ranged from minimal (being almost entirely teacher presentation) to extensive. The most extensive pupil involvement in school classrooms was in science and mathematics classes, where faculty staff ensure that student teachers see active learning.

The staff has adopted a policy of providing feedback to students within one week of receiving or observing their work.  In many classes, formalized feedback forms are used.  Perhaps because feedback is generally so complete, students notice when it is not.  In a few cases, particularly in classroom work, students were concerned that the feedback told them their strengths and weaknesses, but they felt there was little information on how to improve.

Grade:            A

Standard Domain 2:   Faculty staff and staff development

In general, there are sufficient staff to teach the required courses.   The exception is in the area of social studies where there were two vacancies at the end of last year.  The dean and department chair state it is a priority to find qualified staff in this area.   A review of teaching assignments over the past two years indicates there had been a problem in the area of English, but this has been solved with the appointment of two new staff.

With the above exception, staff meet the academic qualifications for the courses they teach.  All have at least an MA in the relevant area and about 75% have PhDs. The number of faculty staff who teach methods courses and are active in schools, is small.  Some faculty staff who teach in educational science are not active in schools.  This has been identified as a problem area.

Only about 10% of the staff had worked in schools prior to joining the faculty.  The professional development committee has listed for further discussion how to use the partner school arrangements to give staff more involvement in schools. 

Most staff have published in relevant areas, though this is a problem in music and art where publication rates are low.

Nearly all staff are active in the use of instructional technology in their teaching.  Several students commented positively on the staff use of technology.   Staff use of the library is judged appropriate.

In general, faculty staff are active in professional development.  Staff records show that only about 10% of them show little professional renewal over the last three years.  Some of this can be explained by personal or family problems.   Older staff tend to help newer ones develop good habits of professional development.  Support for research, which staff indicate has been a problem in the past, has been improved somewhat under a new dean.  Much of the professional development is undertaken by individuals.  However, the staff have given collective priority to professional development activities which increase the use of instructional technology and to strengthening connections with partner schools.  Staff assignments are generally made to take advantage of individual interests as well as program needs.

Teaching is generally of high quality.  The university uses a standard student evaluation-of-teaching form.  The student ratings of education faculty staff are among the highest in the university.  While staff generally regard each other as good teachers, there is no systematic basis, such as observing each others’ classes, or other peer review, on which they make this judgement.  Most staff vary their teaching methods according to the objectives, though students report that a small number use only lecture methods.

There are no extracurricular activities which particularly support student academic work.

Grade:            B

Standard Domain 3:   Students: intake, progress and achievement, support and guidance

Students are reasonably qualified on entrance.  Test scores of entering students were low, but have been rising since the program opened.  The new group represent the mid-range of students entering classroom teaching in all Turkish universities.

Staff and students report that while most students are motivated to enter teaching, each year a few are not.  These students try to enter other programs.

Data in the documents room indicates that 85% of the entering students continue with the program until graduation.  Most who leave before then enrol in other university programs. 

Absenteeism is reported at XX% overall.  In general, staff report that student attendance improves as students gain experience in the program.  Absenteeism was reported to have been a problem in English classes before permanent staff were appointed.

Students report that in general staff are available to provide appropriate support and guidance.  Students also report they would like more help from the faculty to work in village schools to which many of them will be assigned for their first teaching jobs.  Students realise they will have to teach multiple-grade classes and will be expected to teach adult literacy.  They do not feel well prepared in these areas.

A staff committee is revising the student handbook to fit the new curriculum.  A draft version is being used by first year students.  There is no articulated policy in the area of attendance, nor for students with academic difficulties.  Student surveys indicate that students who have problems in the area of mathematics have trouble finding remedial help.

Grade:            C

Standard Domain 4:   School partnerships

Partner schools are selected according to published criteria.  The University is located in a well-to-do area and most partner schools are close by.  At present there are not sufficient arrangements for students to work in the full range of school settings.  This problem has been recognised by the dean who is working with the local IME Müdür to select additional partner schools.

Within partner schools, there are adequate numbers of qualified mentors overall.  However, the self-evaluation report indicates that within the partner schools there are problems providing adequate support for classroom teaching students in the areas of art, English, and mathematics.  The team agrees.

Formal partner school arrangements are new this year.  Two of the partner schools seem well-established and build on prior personal and professional relationships between teachers and faculty staff.  Plans are well developed in these schools, particularly in organising the activities of Okul Deneyimi.

In the other formally designated partner schools, the arrangement is less well developed and activity plans are not complete.  Visits from faculty staff are less frequent, fewer teachers are involved, and feedback to students is somewhat irregular.

Overall, students are gaining better experiences in the more developed partner schools.  In these schools they understand their roles and feel more confident they will receive good mentoring and regular feedback.

The main coordinator of the partner school arrangement for the classroom teaching program has recently retired, explaining some of the delays in formal documentation.

Students in the old program report not having sufficient time in schools to practise all the skills required of beginning teachers.  Also, in surveys and in meetings they report wanting more regular feedback from their mentors and faculty staff.  Faculty staff and mentors understand these problems.  In the two well-developed partner schools, staff are working effectively to improve these aspects in the new program.

The dean and program head understand the difficulties to date in establishing partner schools.  The self-evaluation was quite candid in this area.  A formal plan for improvement has been developed by the staff.

Principals of approximately half the partner schools are helpful in arranging for students to work in classrooms which are well-managed and have good discipline, and to follow the Okul Deneyimi activities.  These classrooms vary considerably in their size, grade levels, and teaching methods, giving students opportunities to see how good classrooms can be organized and managed.

Students in their third and fourth years have limited opportunity to work in schools.  They have practised some teaching techniques in micro-teaching sessions, but their involvement with real pupils is limited and the opportunity for their faculty staff to give them useful feedback about their teaching skills is likewise limited.   The curricular planning and work on the assessment plan give good promise that this area will show considerable improvement as the new curriculum is implemented.

Grade:            C

Standard Domain 5:   Learning resources: facilities and equipment, library, usage

Classrooms are generally of appropriate size and configuration to accomplish a variety of teaching methods.  Classes on the north side of the building are often cold in the winter.  Also, there is a persistent problem with ventilation in the art studios, causing safety concerns.

The program shares three general purpose computer laboratories with other programs of the faculty.  Two of these laboratories are new; equipment and software in the third is approximately four years old.   Starting this year, a staff member has been added to provide support for the computer labs.  Staff and students report much satisfaction with this addition.

With the emphasis on technology, staff have requested that at least one classroom be wired to include computers as part of each student station.  There are plans for additions next year, but the funding is uncertain.

Most classrooms are equipped to permit faculty staff to use technology in their teaching, although light control is a problem in some rooms.

The library is barely adequate to support the programs and not adequate to support faculty research.  Because the University is new, most books are relatively new.  Due to changing University priorities, the library reports having purchased only 500 books in each of the past four years.  Only about 100 books in education were added in the past four years.  Students and staff rely heavily on photocopied materials for classes.  The library is particularly short on books relating to problems of Turkish education, a general reference collection, and materials on technology in education.  There is a system for staff to request books and the education staff use the system.  However, the total number of purchased books has been inadequate recently.

The library is a pleasant place to work and study.  Students report that it is open sufficient hours for their use.  The librarians have designed an effective program of teaching students to use information resources, including resources available thorough the Internet.  The library has expanded the number of computer stations and Internet access in the past two years.    In these areas, the library gets good reviews by staff and students.  All, however, agree that the photocopying services of the library are unsatisfactory.  Machines are few and often not working.

Laboratories are generally well equipped.  Equipment provided by the NEDP project is available.  Principles for using special facilities are well established and followed by faculty staff, research assistants, and students.

Only about half the staff have suitable offices.  Because the classroom teaching program is new and has grown rapidly, many staff have been assigned to shared offices, former store-rooms and other inadequate space.  As a result, not all staff have access to computers and telephones, or the privacy to speak to students confidentially.

The computers which are available to staff are generally new and well maintained.  The faculty employs a full-time technician to support staff use of computers and teaching technology.

The curriculum provides ample opportunity for students to use special facilities such as  science laboratories, studios, and computers and to gain the skills necessary to use special equipment in their teaching.  The new curriculum assessment plan includes an assessment of students’ use of teaching equipment, starting in the second year.  Of the three science laboratories, the biology and chemistry labs showed considerable evidence of use by classes.  The physics lab had not been used in the past two months.  First year science students observed in a practical class in the biology lab were familiar with the equipment, chemicals, and materials being used.

Students report that they do not use the library significantly for their education courses except in educational science.  There, case studies, historical analyses and other assignments require student use of the library.  They do report using the Internet for finding teaching materials and other sources related to their teaching methods courses.  Overall, students said they were better skilled at finding material on the Internet than in reference books. 

Grade:            C

Standards Domain 6:  Management

The faculty is led by the Faculty Management Board which meets once a week.  The Mission Statement has just been written to accommodate changing circumstances. It is brief and needs development.

There are three commissions, each chaired by a member of senior management.  They are school partnership, evaluation and quality assurance, and curriculum development.  All levels of staff and all departments are represented.  Communication from senior management to staff is adequate.  Records of meetings from two of these commissions were not available.

The staff has had considerable involvement with the NEDP.  Five members were on various subject panels.  25 staff attended different workshops during the curriculum development phase, and the faculty hosted a successful Partnership Course in June 1998 with 12 staff and all partner schools attending.  Staff indicate a strong desire to continue to be involved in national development.  One staff member is consultant to the Basic Education Project.

The financial documents available showed that the revolving fund was low.  The fund has had little income in the past three years.  Extra money to fund initiatives was not available.

Grade:            B

Standard Domain 7:   Quality Assurance

The University has QA policies and procedures which guide the appointment, review, and promotion of faculty members.  In addition, the education faculty has developed QA procedures on faculty review.

The University has a method to involve students in the evaluation of teaching.  Participation among students is high.  There is evidence that the results are taken seriously.

Student surveys are used regularly to measure student satisfaction with various aspects of the teacher education program.  However, as the self-evaluation notes, these forms need to be revised to match the new curriculum.

The faculty staff review student academic progress.  There has been no formal process to review student progress on developing the skills needed by beginning teachers.  The dean and program head indicate this will be part of next year’s work in implementing the new curriculum.

In general, both faculty staff and students were well informed about the policies and procedures related to quality assurance.

The faculty devote an annual meeting to considering feedback about the program.  Although the meeting is held each year and records are kept, the mechanism for follow-through is not always clear.  Not all proposed changes noted in the minutes are assigned to individuals or groups who will be responsible.   A review of the records of the past two years indicates that many (though not most) agreed-to changes are made.  Part of the difficulty here may be related to the evaluation of one curriculum while the faculty are implementing a new one.

Grade:            A

Conclusions and recommendations

The principal strengths* as identified by the team are:

1        The program in classroom teaching follows the YÖK curriculum.  Course outlines are well specified with clear objectives.  An assessment plan is being developed which will tie the curriculum to skills needed by beginning teachers.  (Domain 1)

2        The quality assurance mechanisms are well developed in the classroom teaching program.  Policies and procedures are generally complete.  Students and staff are aware of them.  Staff actively use feedback for program improvement. (Domain 7)

The principal weaknesses identified by the team are:

1        Partnership with schools in the classroom teaching program is not well developed.  For most schools, there is a lack of clear coordination between the mentor teachers and the faculty staff, activity plans are not complete.  (Domain 4)

2        The library collections are not adequate to support the classroom teaching program. (Domain 5)

Recommendations:

1        The faculty should give priority attention to the development of the partner school arrangements.  Work should continue to assure a broader range of partner schools and more structured work for student teachers during school experience I and II.  Contact between mentors and faculty staff should be regularized.  Activity plans should be developed for each partner school.  (Domain 4)

2        The staff should work with the library and the university administration to ensure that adequate collections are available to support the classroom teaching program.  (Domain 5)

3        The art studios should have adequate ventilation so that the health hazard is removed.  (Domain 5)

*NOTE:  Principal strengths and weaknesses are drawn from all programs reviewed.  Some programs may have no principal strengths or no principal weaknesses.  Strengths and weaknesses should be agreed upon by the team as a whole.  The examples included here are possible strengths and weaknesses, based on the report.  If a particular strength or weakness is found in all or almost all programs it might be written to reflect that fact.  (For example, “The library collections are not adequate to support the teacher preparation programs reviewed.”)

Team recommendation to YÖK

The team which visited Deniz University on October 24-26, 2000 reviewed the faculty self-evaluation and the documents provided in the team room.  The team met with faculty staff, administrators, students, mentors and others as specified in the visit program.

1        Based on the above, the team recommends that the classroom teaching program be awarded Full Accreditation.

This recommendation is based on the overall satisfactory state of the program, the candor with which the faculty staff, students, mentors, and administrators approached the process, and the degree to which they are aware of and working to address important issues for improvement.

(NOTE:  A separate recommendation would be made for each program reviewed.)

Comment on the visit: confidential from team to YÖK

The team found the self-evaluation to be an accurate and fair description of the programs being reviewed.  The self-evaluation was a useful identification of the issues on which the team could focus.  The staff have an accurate sense of the concerns verified by the team.

All logistical arrangements were made so that the team could focus productively on its work.  The faculty staff, the dean, the students, and the staff of the partner schools were all available to meet with the team.

The documents were generally well prepared and well organised.  Student work was generally well-displayed.  However, there was insufficient documentation of the partner school arrangements for classroom teaching, primary mathematics, and secondary chemistry programs.

Signed by the Team Chair:____________________________