 |
From Vision to Action: Framework for the Continuous Improvement of Units of Education
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Relevance
The goal of this presentation is to propose a framework for continuous improvement for
units of education in their respective external contexts that uses systems thinking to: a) define the relationship between performance-based standards; b) describe their individual and collective influence throughout the educational unit; and c) define other factors that influence and co-evolve with professional education. The proposed framework uses systems thinking to capture the complexity of the environment by facilitating a comprehensive understanding of the context; by defining sub-systems and understanding the nature of their inter-relationships; and by identifying stakeholders and constraints, including their respective environmental impacts. The authors further propose that this depth of understanding is a critical and necessary step for units who seek to pursue a path of continuous improvement. Implication for action
By incorporating systems thinking into the development of our continuous improvement
model, we are able to graphically explain the individual and collective influence of each and all the NCATE standards, technology resources and integration, as well as other environmental influences on our system – our College of Education and similar units. We believe that this knowledge is vital to identifying and understanding the factors that influence our unit’s effectiveness, as well as their individual and collective implications for the entire system, including internal (people and process) and external stakeholders. Such knowledge is vital to our unit’s understanding of the state of our systems, identifying and prioritizing ongoing program, curricular, and other modifications, and fostering realistic expectations of the impact of these modifications, especially on candidate preparation and subsequently P-12 student learning. In short, this framework allows administrators and faculty to effectively manage the needed change that accompanies a dynamic and living system and is necessary for continued unit effectiveness. If standards are to have meaning and add value to the unit’s success, colleges of education must undergo a similar self-study to understand the unique dynamics of their respective systems. Section II: Outcomes and Methods Learner/participant outcomes
Participants in this session will learn about the design of the framework. They will learn
how the framework has enabled the professional education unit to move toward continuous improvement. Participants will have an opportunity to question and discuss the development process and the over-arching question of how the framework promotes continuous improvement. Methods
The session will have several formats. First, the presenters will give an overview of the
Framework for the Continuous Improvement of Units of Education and the Continuous Improvement Feedback Loop. The presenters will share the design and development of the framework in a question and answer format. Finally, the impact of this framework upon the College and its stakeholders will be discussed.
|
| | Authors: Keil, Virginia. and Haughton, Noela. |
|
| |
|
|
Relevance
The goal of this presentation is to propose a framework for continuous improvement for
units of education in their respective external contexts that uses systems thinking to: a) define the
relationship between performance-based standards; b) describe their individual and collective
influence throughout the educational unit; and c) define other factors that influence and co-evolve
with professional education. The proposed framework uses systems thinking to capture the
complexity of the environment by facilitating a comprehensive understanding of the context; by
defining sub-systems and understanding the nature of their inter-relationships; and by identifying
stakeholders and constraints, including their respective environmental impacts. The authors
further propose that this depth of understanding is a critical and necessary step for units who seek
to pursue a path of continuous improvement.
Implication for action
By incorporating systems thinking into the development of our continuous improvement
model, we are able to graphically explain the individual and collective influence of each and all
the NCATE standards, technology resources and integration, as well as other environmental
influences on our system – our College of Education and similar units. We believe that this
knowledge is vital to identifying and understanding the factors that influence our unit’s
effectiveness, as well as their individual and collective implications for the entire system,
including internal (people and process) and external stakeholders. Such knowledge is vital to our
unit’s understanding of the state of our systems, identifying and prioritizing ongoing program,
curricular, and other modifications, and fostering realistic expectations of the impact of these
modifications, especially on candidate preparation and subsequently P-12 student learning. In
short, this framework allows administrators and faculty to effectively manage the needed change
that accompanies a dynamic and living system and is necessary for continued unit effectiveness.
If standards are to have meaning and add value to the unit’s success, colleges of education must
undergo a similar self-study to understand the unique dynamics of their respective systems.
Section II: Outcomes and Methods
Learner/participant outcomes
Participants in this session will learn about the design of the framework. They will learn
how the framework has enabled the professional education unit to move toward continuous
improvement. Participants will have an opportunity to question and discuss the development
process and the over-arching question of how the framework promotes continuous improvement.
Methods
The session will have several formats. First, the presenters will give an overview of the
Framework for the Continuous Improvement of Units of Education and the Continuous
Improvement Feedback Loop. The presenters will share the design and development of the
framework in a question and answer format. Finally, the impact of this framework upon the
College and its stakeholders will be discussed.
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
