-
GLS Faculty works with
observers
-
GLS Faculty works with
middle school physical ed methods class from Missouri State
-
They observe, they
teach, GLS faculty helps design lesson plan, video tapes
-
3-10 practicum students
that she is responsible for 30 hrs week
-
Help GLS faculty, they
guide they teach
-
Student teachers – at
first 5 at one time several years ago
-
Approx 8 yrs ago, no
student teachers,
-
Practicum students
-
Encounter groups
-
Math classes – Brown,
+1
-
Project Forest – kids
in classroom all day long
-
Summer teacher
workshops – GLS National leaders and good done in the past
-
Measurement and
Evaluation assessment class done at Greenwood
-
Elementary Rhythms
class
-
Stability of faculty
-
Stability of student
body
-
Teacher/student ratio
is both a strength and a challenge
-
Student opportunities –
lots of different activities, can do a lot of opportunities without a lot of
competition.
-
Small family
environment, no one gets lost in shuffle.
-
These small group
discussions started recently are a plus and hope they continue.
-
Parental involvement.
-
Overall size of school.
-
One building.
-
Interaction of all
ages.
-
Everyone knows
everyone.
-
Buddy program in K-4.
-
Notebooks to
communicate to Missouri State faculty.
-
Missouri State faculty have
participated in classrooms
-
David Ashley from math
dept brought his students, and he took his students to Missouri State to work on geometry.
-
Nursing, PE
interaction, classes to nutrition computer area to keep track of diets etc.
-
Disability type baseball
taught by Missouri State.
-
Foreign exchange
students at GLS – have tried more outside contacts Kenya, etc.
-
If Missouri State displeased, why
didn’t we know before this BIG surprise – GLS faculty and parents both feel
this way
-
Football in Australia,
compared to football in America
-
Writing program has
helped
-
Teachers
-
GLS student advanced
grades and attending Missouri State, and moving up
-
GLS faculty has
opportunity to teach outside the classroom but….
-
7th grade
English writing
-
Communications
-
What does Missouri State want?
-
Gym
-
Speakers Bureau
-
How to integrate with
Missouri State
-
Integration is
all-volunteer at present – there must be structure
-
Missouri State faculty are not
experts in teaching the younger children
-
Somebody be assigned
the responsibility for the GLS/Missouri State experience
-
There has to be a
formal organization structure established
-
Missouri State staff schedule
does not meet GLS’s
-
No morning care program
-
No summer care program
-
Communications – is the
problem that Missouri State does not know what is done at GLS
-
How to get the people
making the decisions to observe the GLS faculty, to be around GLS to know what
is going on at GLS
-
The parents as a group,
and the GLS faculty as a group want to do what Missouri State wants but we don’t know
what that is
-
What does Missouri State
want? We want to do it? But we don’t know what it is?
-
Inventory what is
currently being done
-
No input into GLS
Administration search by faculty or parents?
This person is critical to the success of the GLS – especially if this
person is going to be the one communicating between GLS and Missouri State
-
Support GLS faculty
efforts
-
Director should be
intimately involved in the classrooms AND Missouri State
-
We’re going to have new
leadership and now is the time to pick, and be involved in
-
Is the new Director
going to buy into all we’re doing now?
-
An effective leader
should have an agenda in mind
-
Financial Information
Feedback – GLS
-
No financial support
for extra programs – faculty pay
-
Communications!
Communications! Communications!
-
Demonstration of
respect for our existing faculty
-
Internal communications
– administration, faculty, parents, students, Missouri State
-
External communications
– other schools, media
-
Authoritarian
management style
-
Program evaluations
-
Record keeping,
evaluation and reporting of “experiments”
-
Accountability for Missouri State
-
Performance Measurements
-
Benchmarks
-
Students/teacher ratio
-
$/student
-
Compare locally and
regionally, MO and national
-
Set the standard for
what the educational system should be routinely benchmarking
-
Missouri State’s funding of this
integration must be there
-
You can’t hold the GLS
Director responsible or accountable for something outside their scope of
authority
-
Dual appointment - official, integration between campus
allowing for positive exchange of classrooms without overload of teachers which
they do not get paid for while still providing students the proper education
-
Financial Information
Feedback
-
How much is being
received and spent? Total? Missouri State?
Parents?
-
Grants
-
Foundation Funds –
balances, receipts, fund drives,
-
How to improve teacher
moral during all this chaos
-
New change management
philosophy by Missouri State
-
Faculty communication
plan to feed information back to Missouri State
-
Communication study at
GLS
-
Loss of most
intellectual students and challenged students because we can‘t meet their
diverse needs
-
Go back to the Focus
Group Reports from April 2001
-
Dept of Ed or whomever
that undermined past programs at GLS – e.g. amount paid for teaching, equity in
pay, closing of Summer Stars,
-
Dept of Continuing Ed
assumed control of part of the core business product of the GLS, and undermined
the GLS faculty etc
-
Accountability must be
commensurate with authority
-
Align resources with
the goals
-
GLS too many goals –
got faculty going too many different directions
-
Assuring that we
maintain high quality, experienced teachers at GLS
-
Students well prepared
for college & life
-
Critical thinking
skills are strong among graduates
-
There is a culture of
accomplishment at Greenwood
-
People are friendly and
accepting of new comers
-
There is a feeling of
family
-
Teachers are well
trained, like what they do, put in great effort and are dedicated
-
Students all
have an opportunity to participate in whatever they want to participate in
-
Our current standards
for teachers has resulted in a faculty that are both strong in their chosen
discipline and teaching skills
-
Need to provide more
public outreach—Greenwood teachers instructing other teachers in the public
school system in the area.
-
Need appropriate
planning and funding to carry out the changes being contemplated by University
governing body and administration
-
To have a clear channel
of communication to parents (Greenwood Community) from University
administrators who are charged with administrating Greenwood
-
Accelerate the
strategic planning process so parents can decide if they want to keep their
children here
-
Getting parents to be
patient as the process is occurring
-
Achieve some
predictability about parent’s financial obligations to keep students in
Greenwood
-
Getting administrators
at Greenwood who are leaders who will advocate for the best education for
Greenwood students even if his or her choices are not popular with parents,
University administrators and other “Greenwood Community” members
-
Getting stability in
administration at Greenwood to achieve necessary discipline
-
Getting a person in
place and a policy implemented to direct and monitor University student’s
activities with Greenwood students so that both student groups realize a
positive learning experience
-
Competitive academic
environment.
-
Small size – safe
atmosphere – everyone knows everyone else.
-
On the Missouri State campus.
-
Good relationship b/w
the upper and lower grade levels – positive family relationship.
-
Sense of tradition is
positive.
-
Greenwood graduates
stand far above graduates of other schools.
Group 3 - Challenges
-
Retention of qualified
and motivated faculty. Concern also
regarding the public’s perception of how things are being ‘run’ at
Greenwood.
-
The reputation of
Greenwood ‘University wide.’ Great deal
of effort trying to recruit Missouri State faculty to participate at GLS.
-
Opportunities are there
for students – why isn’t there more access to University programs?
-
Disingenuous for the
administration to be critical of GLS when “they” are in charge of the
school.
-
In the old days GLS was
in Hill Hall – there was a lot of involvement b/w students and faculty. Greenwood started to change during the
Marshal Gordon years when tuition began to increase.
-
Is there a wall b/w GLS
and Missouri State?
-
Structured curriculum
doesn’t allow for a lot of integration b/w GLS students and university
departments
-
The administration is
saying that we must become a Lab school, but not leading.
-
Funding of lab schools
– what is the commitment.
-
Who is Greenwood
accountable to?
-
Quality education for
students – balance in regard to university connection and GLS
Group 4 - Strengths
-
Speaking a s a member
of the faculty, willing and committed faculty
-
Faculty member: size of
school enables faculty to get to know students and parents. Keeping size
constant is a strength
-
Parent of first and
fourth grader: consumer of Greenwood product, pleased with sense of community.
-
Parent: community atmosphere. Parental involvement,
want input in education and fully support faculty in that effort. No
adversarial relationship between faculty and parents
-
Parent of elementary
students (K and 2nd). In speaking with graduates and parents
academic standards are higher than surrounding schools. Higher behavioral
standards. Conduct at higher level.
-
Parent of 4th
grader. What are parents here for? Are we contributing to future goals and
objectives. CC: That is part of strategic planning. Preset goals had been
available in the past for strategic planning, but currently no preset goals are
presented. Goals are being formulated as part of the planning process.
-
BOG will develop plan
for evaluation of GLS based on input from strategic planning process. CC: don’t
know all the answers to questions re: criteria for eval.
-
Parent: child has done
well, and attributes this to administration and the faculty. Has background in
ed., child does well within and outside of school. Attributes success to
teachers. Concerned that teachers may be leaving. CC: applying the learning of
skills learned in Greenwood to other areas of life outside of GLS.
-
Parent of 1st
grader. Quality and commitment of staff. Community feeling in small school.
Stable relationships with other students and teachers. Character and value
building of students coming out of school. Other adults comment on positive
behavior of daughter as if public affairs values of Missouri State have rubbed off on GLS
students.
-
Faculty: vision of
faculty that they have shared with parents and students. Sharing vision in
North Central goals. Group that works together and knows where we’re headed
does a good job.
-
Director: effective
school research says attendance, achievement (state, national, etc.), esteem of
students, successes demonstrated by students in extracurricular activities. CC:
general quality issues of a lab school.
Group 4 - Challenges
-
What are the barriers?
Definition of a lab school has changed. First, clinical experiences. Second,
outreach center for prof dev. Of colleagues in public schools. Innovative
environment is a new goal. CC: how we define the school, perhaps with original
definition, more clarity can be achieved.
-
Faculty member and
parent. More from faculty viewpoint. Challenge of involving Missouri State colleagues into
GLS. Many overtures to involve Missouri State faculty have been turned down. GLS faculty
values mutual involvement, University can improve involvement.
-
Parent. New to the GLS community. Sense that Missouri State was
not interested in GLS. Even though it would be advantageous to students, e.g.
Specialty facilities on campus are not available to GLS students. Suddenly, a
few months ago, purpose of integration is not fulfilled. Why suddenly is
integration a raging problem, when over the past five years it was not an
issue. CC: Old adage, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Keiser says, we have
not been fulfilling our commitment to Greenwood.
-
Parents got some of the
blame for the “pulling away.” Dr. Glines seemed to point out fault with
parents.
Group 4 – Challenges,
continued
-
Parent. Agreed with
previous statement. Sudden identification of problem of integration,
specifically the computer labs. Concerned that the image and the presence that
the Missouri State administration has made let GLS down. Cuts of TV filming of summer
meeting did not make GLS look good.
Looked like Missouri State was treating GLS as a stepchild and wanted to throw it
off. No one answered the question as to who invited them.
-
Parent. Agrees with
previous statements, in addition, concerned with who is going to help parents
formulate the plan, who will take the lead in formulating the strategic plan.
CC: This process is to get as much clarity and information out to parents so
parents can understand models of lab schools, including taking trips. Our
Springfield community may have views of what lab schools should be - unique
from other lab schools in the country. We’re starting from the point where the
model is being created. Group will collectively decide what the lab school
concept will be at GLS. (Participant: Steering committee will have large
portion of the task in defining lab school, goals, etc.)
-
Parent. High
expectations put in place, and then within 2-5 years, they go down the drain.
Who will implement strategic plan. CC: Resources, facility, funding of
projects, will be supported. Director holds lion share of responsibility for
follow through. Assessment will look at the outcomes of the children. Research
must ask and discern why children perform well. Tradition of GLS for high
standards will continue on.
-
Parent: I ran away from
teaching because of financial disincentives. Flight of faculty because of
financial reasons. Professional status of GLS faculty should be at least an
instructor status within respective department on Missouri State campus. There should be a
waiting list for teachers to get on at GLS. Right now we have a lot of quality
teachers, but fear is that within next 4-5 years, prospective teachers will be
drawn away.
-
Faculty: Echo negative
press and negative focus group summaries. Still upset with some of that.
Utilization of lab school requires Missouri State involvement, must be brought on board
very early. Diversity is a challenge. Strong parent base, but with negative
press, she hears of parents planning to find another school.
-
Director: Desire for
diverse school, but raising of tuition to make it a cash cow does not allow for
diversity. Future teachers need to have experience with diverse population.
Funding has to be available for promoting diversity.
-
WHAT IS IT GLS SHOULD
BE DOING IN 2006-07?
-
Difficult to answer
that when we don’t know where we’re at. As parents we’ve been satisfied, but
someone else is defining the problems. Parents need to be educated as to what
the problems are?
-
Faculty: wants a fully
integrated lab school/university environment. Get older students out of
building into service learning experiences.
-
Director: Missouri State has got
to attach a funding plan to the strategic plan. Without money, strategic plan
cannot be implemented. CC: funding mechanism must be adequate enough to support
plan.
-
Class size of 30 has
got to be changed. State is talking about reducing class size to less than 20,
so issue of class size has got to be addressed.
-
Learning is going
on.
-
Successful character
building.
-
Graduates are well
prepared for college (medical school).
-
A lot of integration is
going on already.
-
Environment is good.
-
Professional development
programs.
-
Current faculty.
-
Parents and parent
involvement.
-
High test scores,
continue to increase, science is a concern.
-
Fine arts and music
program is exceptional.
-
Good sports programs,
every child can participate.
-
Healthy competitiveness
among students that everyone wants everyone to do their best, no matter what
their abilities are.
-
Small group community
atmosphere.
-
Low tolerance for
non-serious students.
-
Pre service teachers in
classrooms this year are excellent!
-
Lack of diversity,
especially economic diversity. But how
will this work?
-
Foster more integration
and make it visible. University faculty
participation has been difficult to coordinate at times.
-
Teachers need more
resources to allow for more involvement.
How do they juggle already full workloads?
-
Inability to hire and
retain the most qualified teachers due to low salaries. Where is masters plus 3?
-
Continue to emphasize
character education.
-
We need observation
rooms for higher grades.
-
Service learning
opportunities. Don’t focus only on
education majors, but also pure subject majors.
-
Need more faculty
families (children of faculty) at Greenwood.
-
Educate parents on role
of Greenwood within University.
-
Improved communication.
-
Quality of some field
experience level university students in upper grades. Not prepared for presentations that they are giving. Closer supervision needed. Better mentoring.
-
Overcoming stereotype.
-
Siblings should be able
to get preference over community in entering school.
-
Greenwood needs to feel
like an integral part of the university.
Have administration facilitate us to make decisions instead of handing
down edicts.
-
Foreign language
opportunities in the elementary level are absent.
-
Is Greenwood the
correct size?
-
We need a coordinator outside
of the college of education to mediate University staff teaching at Greenwood.
-
Students get started on
the right foot and have a good start.
-
Students at school want
to learn.
-
Curriculum good,
especially (physics and chemistry) secondary science
-
Good emphasis on
critical thinking skills learned by students at Gwd.
-
Good reputation in the
community. Faculty and outcomes of
students help determine
how Greenwood is perceived.
-
Students learn to
manage themselves and their time well, partially because of environment and
atmosphere that promotes self-discipline.
-
Volume of homework
beneficial preparation for later in college.
-
Research paper and the
high expectations are also beneficial for this preparation.
-
Integrate and manage
work, play, and schoolwork.
-
Self-esteem of
Greenwood students is phenomenal.
-
Greenwood helps
establish good work and study habits.
-
Community with
responsible parental support for our children and students.
-
Students bring to the
school an “idea” that they want to learn.
-
Faculty at Greenwood
really “care” about the kids and help with the total development of the
student. (Greenwood Family)
-
Cross development from
interactions with high school and elementary, beneficial for both groups.
-
Good social
interactions.
Group 6 - Challenges
-
How can we maintain
strengths of faculty and continued reputation of Greenwood?
-
Perception of not being
integrated with the University is a problem.
-
Perception of parents
that Dean Hough has an animosity with/about the faculty/administration at
Greenwood.
-
How does the above
affect the current day to day operations of Greenwood?
-
College of Ed. has been
the one not utilizing Greenwood, not the reverse.
-
Afraid tuition is going
to be so high that it runs present families out.
-
Replicating Greenwood
success in other settings.
-
Dean of Ed. has
negative attitude toward faculty of Greenwood.
-
Parents haven’t once
voiced concern over students being used in studies.
-
Dr. Keiser needs
updated information about Greenwood from either College or from Greenwood.
-
Communication and
miscommunication have been and continue to be a problem.
-
Concerns about Dean
Hough and his attitude toward Greenwood.
-
Concerns about the
selection and visit of Glines and the study that he did.
-
Tuition concerns – Lab
school v. private school
-
Concerns that all of
this planning is a ruse to doing something else????
-
Concerns that College
of Ed. will lose accreditation.
-
If someone could list 3
+ things that should be done….we can proceed.
-
Families interested in
keeping students at Greenwood…they perceive Greenwood to be the best school in
the community.
-
Concerned about the
perception that parents are “running” the school, especially from Keiser,
Glines and Hough.
-
Parents, students and
faculty are not afraid of changes, only of change for changes sake.
-
Parents are really
concerned about “what kind” of changes will take place.
-
Facility is a problem
about “becoming the best lab school we can be”.
-
Concerned about much of
Don Glines’ report.
-
Initiating research for
College of Education, or the reverse.
-
Admin. and the faculty
in the college of Ed. come to Greenwood to observe, become involved, and
participate.
-
Faculty needs support
through this process
-
Academic rigor
-
Amount of work – high
expectations for students
-
Reasonably good
communication between administrators and parents
-
Students well prepared
for college
-
Quality of teachers and
their experience and administration.
-
Level of instruction,
expectations, communication.
-
Students work well
together
-
Good resources
available – within the community and Missouri State
-
Parents help with
requests from teachers (resources)
-
Teachers and parents
work well with each other
-
Students feel
challenged and get a good education
-
Students succeed at
college
-
Self-discipline
-
Last 6 years Greenwood
has done an excellent job of working with Missouri State faculty, and has challenged
students to highest degree. The faculty
conducts a lot of research.
-
Safe environment
-
Students have good
relationships with faculty and students
-
Encourages being
creative
-
Social problems – comes
from students and adults
-
University seems to
have no desire for diversity at Greenwood
-
Teachers need to
incorporate diversity into the classroom and among students
-
Hard to get in due to
different categories
-
Need an elementary
foreign language program, it’s a disadvantage for the students
-
Parents from different
backgrounds should be asked to talk about their backgrounds
(Greenwood
once had a foreign language program in the elementary and it was dissolved
mostly due to funding.)
-
Put money in budget for
elementary foreign language program.
- More involvement from other Missouri State faculty. (Most felt they don’t want to be involved because they wouldn’t get paid any more.)
-
Some parents would be
willing to help pay for an elementary foreign language program. Of course, some parents can’t help any more
financially.
-
Integrating culture
-
Diversity should be
more widespread, not just what the government deems as being diverse.
-
Better communication
from the university
-
More positive
recognition of accomplishments of Greenwood faculty and students
-
Unstable leadership
from COE
-
What does the
University want from Greenwood