Major goals for the College over the next three years

The two goals that were listed in last year’s report – to advance in national prominence and to provide strong leadership in public education in Florida – remain constant. The best way to characterize the 2002-03 year is that the College has been in transition. With the selection of a permanent dean (the first in four years), and with the anticipated hiring of a new director of the School of Teaching and Learning (the first in ten years), along with securing appropriate resources that are strategically distributed, the College is well poised to take its place as one of the premier colleges of education in the country. In this report, I review the progress made since last year’s report, and clarify new steps we plan for the future.

1.Increase afocus on graduate education and support for doctoral students

Strong colleges of education are distinguished by the quality and prominence of their doctoral programs. Indicators of quality include such measures as average GRE scores, number of students completing programs, placement records, numbernumbers receiving funded support, faculty productivity, and number of students receiving national awards. In some of these areas, the College has made considerable progress; in other areas, the necessary support is not yet in place.

• In 2001, 35xxx students completed doctoral programs; in 2002, 49xxx students had completed programs.
• From summer 2000 to spring 2001, 199 applications were received for doctoral programs; 88 students were accepted; and 50 first-year students enrolled. From summer 2001 to spring 2002, 234 applications were received for doctoral programs; 88 students were accepted; and 45 first-year students enrolled. The acceptance rate decreased from 44% in 2000-01 to 38% in 2001-02.
• Average GRE scores continue to rise steadily across programs, with programs in educational leadership, English education, school counseling and guidance, school psychology, science education, and research methods posting the highest averages. The mean GRE of first-time doctoral students who enrolled in fall terms increased from 1070 in 2000-01 to 1142 in 2001-02.
• The placement of graduates in top ranked universities continues to be strong, with students taking positions at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Johns Hopkins, Georgia, and Virginia, among other prestigious institutions.
• The number of students receiving funded support has risen, with 53students currently on fellowships. The number of students on research assistantships increased from 26 in 2001-02 to 69 in 2002-03. We also received several new endowed scholarships and fellowships this year.
• Faculty productivity has increased in the past 5 years, despite the fact that state funding has declined and that the salaries are considerably lower than those at comparable institutions. A major concern is our ability to attract and retain outstanding faculty in these difficult budgetary times.
• Several students received prestigious state and national awards. For example, Randy Scott, a graduate student in educational administration (and a teacher at P.K. Yonge) is the 2003 Teacher of the Year for the state of Florida. Anne Bishop, a 2001 doctoral graduate, was awarded the 2002 Outstanding Researcher Award by the Council for Learning Disabilities.

• Graduate student stipends continue to be a problem. The current stipend is $11.07 per hour, far below that offered in some other colleges (e.g., TA and RA positions make $16.80 per hour in Engineering). Given the prominence of certain programs, there is no question we could recruit more highly qualified students with better support.

Another aspect of graduate education that will receive increased attention over the coming years is the development of new masters and doctoral programs to meet the needs of practitioners for enhanced professional development. This issue is more fully discussed in other sections of this report.

2.Increase research productivity by increasing the research infrastructure within the college.

In last year’s report, we indicated that faculty research productivity was strong but not well supported. In the 2001-02 National Comparison Study (NCS), which compared the College with nine other AAU public institutions, we ranked 1^st in research expenditures per faculty, 2^nd in refereed articles per faculty, 1^st in graduate credit hours generated per faculty, and second in undergraduate credit hours generated per faculty. Research productivity in the College has increased greatly in the past 5 years, despite the fact that resources have decreased. (Please see appendix for attached NCS report.) To increase research productivity, we must create a support office that will provide faculty with grant information, assistance in preparing grant proposals, and help with grant management. Responsibilities and resources from the Office of Graduate Studies and Research, along with support from the provost’s office, have been realigned to create a new office that will be operational by summer, 2003. In addition, the new Institute for Child and Adolescent Research and Evaluation (ICARE) will share space with this office, increasing the productivity and effectiveness of both endeavors.

3. Support outreach to public schools across the state

The College has a long tradition of outreach to public schools, a pattern that has intensified over the last few years. The examples are too numerous to list, but here are some highlights:

• The Alliance program is now in its third year of operation and offers a full slate of professional development activities for teachers, and new programs for students. One very successful program is a reading tutor program between seniors at Miami Senior High and Auburndale Elementary School. A sixth school will be added to the Alliance Partnership at the end of May.
• The Lastinger Center is now fully operational and has a full slate of initiatives planned, including a fellowship program this summer for both teachers and principals.
• Joint research activities between COE and PKY are steadily increasing, including the development of an innovative peer counseling model and new ESOL and reading programs.
• Revisions to the principal certification program will be undertaken in partnership with local school districts, the Alliance, and PKY, based on the model that was created with support from a Faculty Innovation grant from the FL Department of Education.
• Membership in the Holmes Partnership, a national consortium of schools, university, and community partnerships focused on improving student learning in professional development schools will be reconfigured to encompass our current outreach efforts.

4.  Improve academic technology and distance learning

This area will undergo significant changes in the next three years. Wewill increase our involvement in distance education, build a data management system to support data driven decision making, and expand to assist faculty and students use of instructional technology. To facilitate these changes, a Technology Advisory Committee has been created and technology has been added as a major responsibility for the Associate Dean of Graduate Studies, Research, and Technology. The following changes are planned:

• A full-time College webmaster has been hired to and will work with offices and departments to redesign and update our webpages. A major emphasis will be placed on making the websites more accessible and attractive for recruitment and development work.
• The conversion from Macs to PC’s in the college wide support offices will be completed by Fall 2003. We are currently recruiting for a full time PC LAN administrator to oversee this process. Departmental conversions will be phased in over time.
• Major equipment upgrades will be needed to replace aging machines and to create a new PC based instructional laboratory. New Microsoft Exchange servers will be added as the College shifts to a PC based operating system.
• A new strategic plan will be developed that outlines the role distance education will play in future program planning, and ways to support faculty and staff development in learning new forms of technology

5.Continue to improve faculty quality, productivity and diversity through strategic hiring

As noted in last year’s report, strategic hiring within the College needs to take into consideration three critical points. One, the reputation of highly ranked programs linked to the College and University Strategic Plan must be maintained as senior faculty retire, move into administrative positions, or leave the university. For example, the Counselor Education department, which is ranked second in the country, is losing three stellar scholars at the end of this year. Due to unexpected circumstances, School Psychology, a rapidly growing program, needs additional faculty to maintain program quality next year. Both the School of Teaching and Learning, and the Department of Educational Leadership will have chair vacancies at the end of this year.

Additional faculty lines lost in last year’s budget cuts will be needed to enable other programs to achieve national ranking. Because of targeted hires over the last few years, several programs in the College have the potential to reach national visibility relatively soon. These programs are early childhood education, educational technology, ESOL/bilingual education, reading, and research methodology. All of these areas are linked to college and university strategic goals, and represent areas of deep concern to the state of Florida. The state’s concerns include providing universal pre-K, improving reading instruction, increasing accountability, and accommodating a rapidly growing population of culturally and linguistically diverse students

A well conceptualized clinical faculty hiring plan needs to be developed to respond to the growing demand for service courses related to certification and new preparation models. The College must respond to Florida’s overwhelming need for new teachers and other school personnel. At the same time, we must provide faculty, especially untenured faculty, with the time and support to pursue funded research. We also need to be sensitive to accreditation requirements that supervision ratios and internship practicum not exceed specified levels. To meet this challenge, we will need more resources to support hiring clinical faculty who will help design and deliver new preparation models.

6. Focus more intensively on alumni outreach, communication, and development fund raising initiatives

This step was added because with the current budget crisis facing the university, and with the likelihood of declining state support in the future, it is apparent that more aggressive alumni and development efforts will be needed. Changes that have been made recently include the following:

• We hired a new development officer February, 2002. She has already restructured the development program, upgraded the database, contacted established donors, and is actively seeking new donors.
• The Office of Educational Outreach and Communication has been restructured to focus completely on disseminating information about the College and its programs to alumni, friends of education, students, and the media. This office will also assist departments with major recruitment campaigns through the development of annual research reports, brochures, and other publications.
• Alumni relations have been strengthened through a series of planned programs that enhance the visibility of the College. These include receptions around the state and across the country, a new opening year convocation, and a new Scholarship of Engagement banquet. The Alumni Advisory Board will also be reconstituted to encourage alumni to take a more active role in college affairs.

Strengths in the College, Areas That Need Improvement, and Ways Both Are Addressed

The College of Education’s programs that align most closely with the strategic plan are those that contribute significantly to children and families and to the College’s reputation, productivity, and rankings. Those programs include: Counselor Education, Special Education, Unified Teacher Education, Educational Leadership, and School Psychology. According to the  U.S. News & World Report’s rankings of Best Graduate Schools in 2003, the College of Education is ranked 19^th among AAU public universities. When the rankings for both private and public AAU institutions are considered, the College of Education is ranked higher than any other unit in the University (tied with Engineering at 29^th).

In this section, I will discuss strategies in place for each department to maintain top rated programs and to increase the visibility of unranked programs. I will outline plans to develop new programs that will meet pressing state needs. Included in this discussion will be references to consolidation and restructuring of programs and the status of current faculty searches. Budget considerations will be addressed separately.

Counselor Education

This department is ranked second nationally, a ranking shared by only one other UF program, Tax Law. The department offers only graduate degrees, preparing professional counselors (M.Ed/Ed.S) and counselor educators (Ed.D/Ph.D).  All professional and doctoral level programs are fully accredited by all relevant accrediting bodies.  Faculty members are recognized as leaders in the profession, are well published, hold offices in national organizations, and edit scholarly journals.  Six professors have published a minimum of two books each in the last three years, all widely used in counselor education programs throughout the country. Service courses offered at the undergraduate and graduate level provide support to academic programs throughout the university.

To maintain its status, this department faces the following challenges:

• Maintain its national accreditation through CACREP and the upcoming NCATE/DOE visits. The CACREP visit was recently concluded, and while the outcome is pending, we expect a favorable review. The other visits are due April, 2003.
• Replace retiring faculty. In June, this department will lose three of its best known and productive faculty to retirement. They were authorized to search this year for one associate and one full professor. Pending approval, the search for an associate professor will be re-opened at the assistant/associate level for two positions, and the full professor search will be rolled over until next year. Because of the age of the faculty (9 of 12 professors are over 55), this department will need to be extremely aggressive and creative in recruitment at a time when counselor education positions are among the most difficult to fill across the country. They will also need to consider greater use of clinical faculty, and productive use of retired faculty who wish to remain actively involved in the department.
• Diversity. With one retirement, the department will lose its only African-American faculty member. However, if one search is reposted, four excellent African-American candidates have already been identified. If any of thesecandidates are hired, this should enhance the department’s ability to attract a more diverse student body.
• Program initiatives and restructuring. Discussions are underway to rethink the school counseling and guidance program, which mirrors discussion at the national level. The department is also actively seeking new opportunities for interdepartmental and interdisciplinary collaborations. As one example, they have been invited to partner with the Department of Psychiatry in the establishment of a collaborative training program.
• Enhance research capabilities. The department is in the process of transforming itself from a practitioner preparation to a counselor education/research program. Particular emphasis will be placed on research that is associated with the creation of new knowledge, practices, or both, and funded with external grant support. New faculty selected over the next several years will be hired with special consideration given to refocusing the direction of departmental research.
• Public school outreach. The department expects to sustain and support school-based programmatic initiatives (P. K. Yonge, Hillsborough County, Prairie View), and to continue its work with the Lastinger Center. The C-LEP program with Hillsborough County is going well, and will be funded for the third and final year. Faculty are applying for a second grant that would address the need for counselors in that district.
• Distance education. The department had hoped to deliver the school counseling program using distance education this year, but it was unable to become operational. This goal will be pursued next year.

Special Education

This department is ranked #10 among public AAU institutions in the most recent U.S. News rankings. Faculty have research and development grants to study literacy, beginning teachers, teacher professional development, school improvement and teacher learning, sustaining school improvement, violence prevention through conflict resolution, and serving students and families with emotional/behavioral disorders. The State faces critical teaching shortages in special education and the department, in strong collaboration with other units in the College, offers one of the best and most unique teacher preparation programs in the nation.

To increase its ranking even more, the department has the following goals:

• Increase the level of grant funding.  This department is very prolific in this area already. Over the last four years, the department’s grant funding increased over 60%, from $2.2 million in 1999-2000 to $3.6 million in 2002-2003. The total funding level for all grants and cooperative agreements with state and federal agencies now amounts to approximately $11 million. This amounts to over $700,000 in total funding per faculty member.
• Create a more stimulating intellectual environment. Activities include: colloquia by visiting faculty; support for national and international conference travel for faculty and students; development of faculty and student exchange programs; support for faculty and doctoral students to attend conferences; support for faculty who wish to take a sabbatical leave at UF.
• Enhance course work and service related to Behavior/Discipline. Activities include: Offering three new courses as part of master’s course work; offering support for local schools in developing school-wide approaches to discipline; working with local schools to develop model approaches to discipline using a Model Center Grant funded by U.S. Dept. of Education.; offering a doctoral seminar related to school discipline; offering web based courses related to discipline/behavior problems, and addressing the needs of children with autism.
• Improve teacher education program. They have developed an integrated teaching field experience, in cooperation with local elementary schools, which is offered as part of the Unified Elementary PROTEACH program. They have completed the design of a new, traditional masters program. Coursework in this program was initially offered in the fall, 2002. In addition, they have developed, or will develop and offer by the summer, 2003, web based courses in Introduction to Special Education, Behavior Management/discipline, Transition and Families, and Students with Autism.
• Improve the doctoral program. They have redesigned the qualifying exam procedure, and redesigned the core seminars to reflect current trends in the field, as well as strengths of the faculty.

This is a fairly young, and highly productive group of faculty. Areas where they can improve include recruiting more diverse students (and in the future, more diverse faculty).

School of Teaching and Learning

This department houses the majority of teacher preparation programs in the Unit, as well as masters and doctoral degrees for professional development, and the preparation of the next generation of teacher educators. Several programs (in Elementary/Special Education and in Early Childhood/Early Childhood Special Education) are known nationally for their innovative teacher education model. Elementary Education was ranked 15^th by U.S.  News in 2001 and, with proper resources, could surpass that ranking. The No Child Left Behind Act emphasizes the nation’s need for quality teachers in every classroom, and underscores the severe teacher shortage. National trends and state needs dictate that we must improve the College’s outreach capacities, especially through on-line technologies. Improvements and expansions in our technology programs will allow us to deliver credit courses and outreach assistance to teachers in critical areas such as reading, ESOL, math, science, and technology.

One promising direction is connected with the state’s new emphasis on early childhood education. To maintain or strengthen all programs related to children and families, our intent is to bring the Baby Gator Child Development Center literally and figuratively closer to the College by making it part of a premier Early Childhood Research Center of Excellence along the lines of the Frank Porter Graham Institute at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.  This initiative becomes especially important since the passage of the Universal Pre-K amendment and the Readiness Coalition work. Physically located in the research center, and linked to other programs on campus, Baby Gator would become a focus for educational research.  Collaborations would include such entities as the Pediatrics Department, the Brain Institute, the Institute for Child and Adolescent Research and Evaluation, and P.K. Yonge.

Despite having highly regarded programs and faculty, and the possibility of exciting new directions, this unit faces many critical challenges:

• Improving the morale of secondary education, given that two programs (math education and foreign languages) have been closed (along with media specialist).
• Addressing faculty workload issues that arise because of extensive engagement with schools, teacher education teaching load, program revision work load, and time requirements for performance assessment.
• Reducing large numbers of graduate courses taught by graduate students or adjuncts, which threatens our accreditation status.
• Acquiring new faculty, particularly in the critical shortage areas of math and science. Two other areas, reading and ESOL, currently have searches underway and are expected to be successfully concluded within the next month.
• Obtaining better support for faculty to secure external funding from grants, contacts and support from foundations, corporations, etc.

Their greatest challenge, however, will be to move away from their reliance on a single model of teacher preparation (ProTeach) and develop additional models to meet the state’s needs in critical shortage areas while still maintaining a reputation for program quality. Any new initiatives in this area are pending based on the outcome of the search for a permanent director. This search is still on-going, and it is not yet clear whether there will be a successful outcome.

Educational Leadership, Policy, and Foundations

This department is also in a state of transition, due to the high number of retiring faculty, and the lack of a permanent chair after the current chair steps down in June. At the same time, there is great potential for this department to rethink its goals and mission. It was ranked 22^nd in U.S. News and World Report’s 2002 survey. The educational leadership program typically graduates 30 students a year, most of whom enter Florida’s public schools or school systems as practicing educators. The state and the nation face critical leadership shortages at the department, school and school district levels. The need is most acute for school principals who are equipped to lead school-improvement efforts and improve teacher and student performance, especially in Florida’s most troubled and troubling schools.

To improve its ranking, the program needs to do several things simultaneously: (a) add research and clinical faculty; (b) increase research productivity through practice-based research and policy analyses; (c) add certificate and distance-learning components to existing programs; (d) explore creating a community leadership doctoral program in conjunction with the Family, Youth, and Community Science program in IFAS; (e) improve supervision of doctoral students, (f) reduce some faculty members’ dissertation committee loads, and (g) work quickly and effectively with other departments and colleges to build an innovative and relevant leadership program that prepares educational leaders to work with schools and community organizations.

Several programs and centers in this department have already been closed (e.g., Enrollment Management ), while other programs (e.g., community college leadership. educational policy, student personnel services) could be developed or expanded to meet growing student demands. Decisions on any potential restructuring moves will be postponed until the new director of STL is hired, since that unit is likely to need the most sustained resources to meet the inexorable demands for new teachers.

Educational Psychology

This department houses three programs: educational psychology, research methods, and school psychology. While none of the programs are currently nationally ranked, they recruit some of the strongest students in the College.The School Psychology Program (SPP) is accredited by the National Association of School Psychologists and the American Psychological Association, and is the College’s largest and fastest-growing graduate program. All SPP faculty members are involved in funded research or international projects, collaborating with departments across the College and University, most notably with the Medical School, Brain Institute, Law School, the College’s Department of Special Education and the School of Teaching and Learning.

Every top-ranked college of education has an exemplary Research Methodsprogram that supports the College’s research mission. Senior faculty enjoy international and national prominence and junior faculty show great promise.  All faculty members have published in top journals and collaborated on funded research projects with faculty from other units, including Special Education, Engineering, Shands, Health and Human Performance, and Nursing.  They have edited five major journals in the field and have been leaders in, and have received awards from, top professional organizations.

Every top-ranked College of Education has a strong, research-driven, practice-relevant Educational Psychology program. Indeed, educational psychology is a core discipline in our field and the most significant research in education is completed or informed by educational psychologists.  Top-ten programs serve their own graduate students as well as students from around the university, but are careful not to let service work overwhelm their research efforts and doctoral programs.

The most pressing issue facing this department is having sufficient faculty, particularly at the senior level, to maintain or advance program quality. The school psychology program is already short staffed, and will need a clinical faculty person in the fall to teach all the required courses. The increased research requirements for all doctoral programs means that more research faculty will be needed. One program they are also interested in establishing is a MA in Evaluation, which would help address the need for trained people to assess state programs. Finally, the service load for the teacher preparation program is quite heavy, and more adjuncts are needed to distribute the teaching load more equitably.

Strategies for Pending Budget Cuts

Last year, the College was hit with a 4.5% budget cut which was met by primarily by cutting unfilled faculty lines and eliminating almost all O&E resources. While some of this funding was restored in the fall, along with five new faculty lines, the cuts still had a significant impact. Because of continuing leadership transitions, this College is not operating with the kind of reserves found in other units on campus. Over time, these reserves will increase, but in the meantime, we need bridge money to make the necessary changes to keep us competitive in the state. Any further budget cuts will not reduce fat; they will reduce the muscle and bone of the College, and weaken its heart. At the same time, further cuts will jeopardize our accreditation, already on thin ice because of the high numbers of graduate students and adjuncts we use in instruction, and the large supervision loads. With the intense national and state focus on education, there is no question we can develop and market new programs that will substantially increase our graduate enrollments. This is especially true now that the Graduate School has approved changes in our admissions policy for masters and specialists degrees for practicing educators. We have already closed some programs; if necessary, we will freeze enrollment in other preparation programs even in the face of high demand from students and expectations from the state that we will do our part to address the teacher shortages,,. and respond to the needs of public schools.

SACS/NCATE/DOE Accreditation Process: Goals and changes for Assessment

In this section I describe the efforts underway to assess our assessment process in relation to the upcoming SACS and NCATE/DOE accreditation visits, both of which will take place in April, 2003. We have three doctoral programs in the professional Education Unit whichthat graduate students who work in K-12 schools: School Psychology, Counselor Education, and Educational Leadership. Formal, systematic evaluation of these programs has been significantly improved in recent years and includes both formative and summative assessments. In response to weaknesses cited in our last NCATE review and to the University’s strategic planning efforts, we are reviewing our advanced graduate programs with two goals in mind: (a) to improve the program and unit-level evaluation of advanced programs and, based on those evaluations, (b) to decide on Unit priorities and improve programs as needed.

Formative Doctoral Program Assessments at the Program and Department Levels

Formative assessment provides feedback to advanced graduate programs over the course of a training program. One important index of each doctoral program’s effectiveness that can be measured throughout training is the satisfactory progress of graduate students. In all programs, student work is evaluated in every course, and satisfactory progress in graduate coursework is defined as a 3.0 GPA. The faculty gather data from a broad array of course activities, including observation, classroom discussion, and analysis of candidate work such as papers, presentations, and tests. These data are used to make adjustments to instruction.

Evaluation of doctoral programs includes more than examining candidate coursework. Each year the faculty in these programs review candidate evaluation data, course rating data, practicum and internship feedback, and other pertinent information, such as the Florida EAP evaluations conducted annually. These data keep doctoral programs aware of gaps that may exist between program goals and candidates’ current knowledge and dispositions. The data help faculty to identify areas of dissatisfaction or concern and to explore improvement strategies.

Summative Doctoral Program Evaluations at the Program and Department Levels

Summative assessment refers to the evaluation that occurs at the conclusion of a doctoral program to determine or judge the outcomes of training. The doctoral programs gather a number of different summative assessment data. For example, all graduates of school psychology and counselor education programs who plan to work in the schools take the Florida Teacher Certification Examination (FTCE). There are three parts to the examination: (a) the College Level Academic Skills Test (CLAST) prior to July 1, 2002, or the Test of General Knowledge after July 1, 2002, (b) the Professional Education (PED) examination, and (c) the Subject Area Examination (SAE). Graduates of the Educational Leadership Program take the Florida Educational Leadership Examination. The pass rate for this exam is 100% for doctoral candidates in these programs.

The number of graduates who are rehired in Florida is also examined annually through basis data provided by the State Department of Education. From 1996 to 1999, the rehire rate for School Guidance and Counseling and School Psychology is 100% in Florida school districts. Data for Educational Leadership (principal program participants) are not included in the DOE follow-up studies. In Counselor Education, for example, program graduates and their employers are surveyed every three to four years. This survey contains items addressing program requirements, quality of professional preparation, present employment, and match between program competencies and job performance. The Educational Leadership program also conducts an extensive exit interview with all program completers. Follow-up evaluations of graduates from the School Psychology and Educational Leadership doctoral programs will be conducted for the first time in Spring 2003.

In addition to these systematic evaluation activities, in 2000-01 the Graduate Studies and Research office conducted a survey of all faculty who had served on doctoral dissertation committees on the quality of dissertations for all recent graduates. In the fall 2001, issues in advanced graduate training were revisited during a faculty retreat, reviewed by a FPC subcommittee, and reinforced in the College’s Strategic Plan. A survey of faculty on research infrastructure was also conducted in 2002. In addition, we recently designed and conducted a graduate student satisfaction survey and another survey for program alumni. Other recommendations from the Graduate Education Planning Committee and recommendations from recent retreats and strategic planning activities are the focus of current reform efforts in graduate education and retention.

Internationalization of Programs

Every department in the College of Education includes within its mission a commitment to diversity and multicultural understanding. Thus, every program requires courses that address such issues as racial and ethnic diversity, multiculturalism, and English for students who speak other languages. Such classes are offered at the undergraduate and graduate levels. In addition, multicultural issues are infused throughout foundational courses offered for all students in the College by the Educational Psychology Department and the Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Foundations. Students work with diverse populations in their required intern experiences and discuss those experiences with College supervisors and on-site cooperating professionals. Departments offer such foundational electives as Comparative Education, the Socioeconomic Foundations of Education, and the History of Education.

Our teacher education programs emphasize multicultural and linguistic diversity. All teacher education students take coursework that prepares them to work with English Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). Depending on the program, students take from one to five courses to prepare them for their role as ESOL teachers. In addition, in the Unified Elementary and Unified Early Childhood Programs, ESOL issues are infused throughout program coursework. We stress ESOL strategies and materials particularly in courses in children’s literature, language arts, and emergent literacy. Graduate programs in the School of Teaching and Learning offer over eight courses each year that include a focus on multicultural, ESOL, or bilingual education. They also offer courses in multicultural literature and multicultural mathematics.

The University of Florida’s English Language Institute is housed in Norman Hall, which enables our students to interact with college students from other countries on every day. Some ESOL courses establish formal occasions for such interactions. For the past 20 years the College has won grants that funded students interested in ESOL graduate study. Two federally funded grants currently provide scholarships/fellowships for 35 graduate students in ESOL at the University of Florida (five Doctoral students and 30 Master’s students).

Every department in the College educates students from other countries. At present, 68 students from other countries are enrolled in College graduate programs. They represent such nations as China, Korea, Cyprus, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Most international students are recipients of competitive study-abroad fellowships within their own countries. Some are awarded University of Florida fellowships for international students. At present, three international students enjoy fellowship support. Four (with several more pending) international students are supported by teaching or research assistantships. Other international students are enrolled at universities in their own countries and study at the University of Florida for a semester or more.

The School of Teaching and Learning admitted 29 new international graduate students in the past two years, 19 of whom enrolled. In addition, they added one faculty member with an international background, bringing their total to five in a Department of 30. To help our international graduate students, STL has added two courses to its curriculum. The first, Perspectives in Curriculum and Instruction, orients students to the structure and history of curriculum development and evaluation in the United States. The second, Academic Scholarship for International Students, helps international students to critically read academic material and critically review the literature in their chosen field.

We encourage our undergraduate students to study abroad and nine COE students have chosen that option. Presently enrolled students have studied at such institutions as Cambridge University, England (one student), the University of Florence, Italy (four students), the University of the Yucatan, Mexico (four students), Hebrew University, Israel, and Granada University, Spain.

The College actively seeks funding to support study abroad. Our first such grant is titled “Instructional Leadership for Educational Technology: A Transatlantic Bridge for Doctoral Studies.” This collaborative project involves five institutions in the United States and Europe. The project will bring two international doctoral students to UF for the 2002 fall semester, when two of our doctoral students will study in Europe. Our goal is to fund five visiting doctoral fellows from Europe and five of our students to study abroad.

Appendix A.  NCS Tables

Table 1

2001-2002 National Comparison of Resources

Number of Full-Time Facultya	State Expendituresb	State Expenditures per Facultyc	Faculty Salary(Full)d	Faculty Salary (Associate)d	Faculty Salary (Assistant)d
Georgia236	Wisconsin$30,390,162	Minnesota$220,927	Indiana$86,664	Minnesota$63,329	Missouri$54,184
Wisconsin162	Minnesota$28,278,782	Wisconsin$187,593	Minnesota$86,364	Missouri$62,211	Wisconsin$50,882
Indiana135	Georgia$22,000,000	Missouri$170,424	Texas$83,436	Indiana$61,467	Indiana$50,030
Ohio State131	Indiana$18,480,223	Penn State$169,218	Wisconsin$82,495	Wisconsin$60,614	Minnesota$49,733
Minnesota128	Texas$13,707,474	Indiana$136,890	Georgia$77,957	Ohio State$57,664	Georgia$48,489
Texas117	Penn State$13,706,660	Texas$117,158	Missouri$75,219	Georgia$57,160	Florida$46,098
Illinois96	Missouri$12,270,532	Florida$110,956	Ohio State$75,146	Texas$56,727	Ohio State$46,062
Florida85	Florida$9,431,328	Georgia$93,220	Florida$70,737	Florida$54,081	Texas$45,833
Penn State81	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A
Missouri72	Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A	Penn StateN/A	Penn StateN/A	Penn StateN/A

Note. Not Available (N/A).

^aUS News & World Report 2003.

^bFlorida National Quality Benchmarking Project Questionnaire.

^cPer faculty calculations based on number of full-time faculty.

^dACSESULGC/APU Salary Survey.

Table 2

2001-2002 National Comparison of Research Productivity

ResearchExpendituresa	Research Expenditures per Facultyb	% Faculty in Funded Researcha	Books per Facultybc	Book Chapters per Facultybc	Refereed Articles per Facultybc	Other Publications per Facultybc
Ohio State$19,600,000	Florida$162,353	Penn State72%	Penn State0.36	Indiana0.64	Penn State1.89	Penn State4.44
Minnesota$19,400,000	Missouri$155,556	Minnesota61%	Missouri0.26	Florida0.53	Florida1.75	Georgia2.85
Wisconsin$17,800,000	Minnesota$151,563	Illinois56%	Florida0.22	Georgia0.31	Missouri1.69	Florida1.20
Georgia$17,200,000	Ohio State$149,618	Indiana56%	Indiana0.12	Missouri0.29	Georgia1.29	Indiana0.90
Texas$15,500,000	Texas$132,479	Florida50%	GeorgiaN/A	Penn State0.25	Indiana1.02	Missouri0.15
Florida$13,800,000	Wisconsin$109,877	Ohio State50%	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A
Missouri$11,200,000	Penn State$109,877	Georgia47%	MinnesotaN/A	MinnesotaN/A	MinnesotaN/A	MinnesotaN/A
Indiana$10,500,000	Illinois$96,875	Missouri40%	Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A
Illinois$9,300,000	Indiana$77,778	Texas27%	TexasN/A	TexasN/A	TexasN/A	TexasN/A
Penn State$8,900,000	Georgia$72,881	Wisconsin22%	WisconsinN/A	WisconsinN/A	WisconsinN/A	WisconsinN/A

Note. Not Available (N/A).

^aUS News & World Report 2003.

^bPer faculty calculations based on number of full-time faculty.

^cFlorida National Quality Benchmarking Project Questionnaire.

Table 3

2001-2002 National Comparison of Teaching Productivity

Undergraduate Credit Hours per Facultyab	Graduate Credit Hours per Facultyab	BA/BS Degrees Awarded per Facultyac	MA/EdS Degrees Awarded per Facultyac	PhD/EdD Degrees Awarded per Facultyac	% National Exams Passedac
Texas479	Florida297	Penn State6.25	Minnesota7.87	Texas1.07	Florida100%
Florida423	Minnesota297	Texas4.29	Florida5.51	Missouri1.06	Georgia100%
Penn State420	Missouri202	Indiana4.29	Ohio State5.51	Penn State0.84	Illinois100%
Minnesota364	Texas188	Minnesota3.50	Missouri4.21	Minnesota0.84	Missouri99%
Indiana353	Indiana149	Wisconsin3.34	Georgia2.03	Illinois0.77	Minnesota97%
Wisconsin329	Georgia140	Missouri2.86	Illinois1.96	Wisconsin0.77	Texas95%
Georgia212	Penn State102	Florida2.66	Indiana1.87	Indiana0.63	Indiana95%
Missouri175	Wisconsin101	Georgia2.35	Penn State1.87	Ohio State0.56	Ohio StateN/A
IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	IllinoisN/A	Texas1.41	Florida0.52	Penn StateN/A
Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A	Ohio StateN/A	Wisconsin1.10	Georgia0.50	WisconsinN/A

Note. Not Available (N/A).

^aPer faculty calculations based on number of full-time faculty.

^bFlorida National Quality Benchmarking Project Questionnaire.

^cUS News & World Report 2003.

Mar.5.2003