Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
PROPOSAL TO CREATE A SCHOOL OF INTEGRATED PLANT, SOIL, AND INSECT SCIENCEBY MERGING THE DEPARTMENTS OF CROPS AND SOIL SCIENCE AND HORTICULTURE
Oregon State University
College of Agricultural Sciences
CPS Tracking #: 81957
April 2011
1. Program Description
a. Proposed Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) number: 011199
CIP # 011199 Title: Plant Sciences, Other Definition: Any instructional program in plant sciences not listed above. (Source: US Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, CIP 2010 ed.)
b. Program Overview: brief overview (1-2 paragraphs) of the proposed program, including its disciplinary foundations and connections; program objectives; programmatic focus; degree, certificate, minor, and concentrations offered.
As part of the strategic reorganization of OSU, we propose to merge the Department of Crop and
Soil Science (CSS) and the Department of Horticulture (HORT) into a School of Integrated Plant, Soil,
and Insect Science (IPSI).
MERGE
Department of Crop and Soil Science (CIP # 011102) and the Department of Horticulture (CIP # 011103)
NEW
Academic Unit: School of Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Science (CIP #011199) in the College of Agricultural Sciences
Degree: BS in Integrated Plant, Soil and Insect Science (CIP # 011199)
Options: o Agronomy o Ecological Landscapes and Urban Forestry o General Horticulture (Ecampus) o Insect Biology and Management o Plant Breeding and Technology o Soil Science o Sustainable Horticulture Production o Therapeutic Horticulture o Turf Management o Viticulture and Enology
Minors: o Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Sciences
2
CONTINUE (Unchanged)
Graduate Degree Programs o MS, MAgr, PhD in Crop Science o MS, MAgr, PhD in Horticulture o MS, MAgr, PhD in Soil Science
o Graduate minors o Crop Science o Horticulture o Soil Science o Entomology
TERMINATE
Departments o Department of Crop and Soil Science (CIP # 011102) o Department of Horticulture (CIP # 011103)
Course Designators o CSS “Crop and Soil Science” o HORT “Horticulture”
Options o Crop Management o Soil Resource Management o Ecological and Sustainable Horticultural Production o Environmental Landscape o General Horticulture o Horticultural Communication o Horticultural Research o Therapeutic Horticulture o Turf Management o Viticulture and Enology
Undergraduate Minors o Crop Science o Soil Science
Graduate Minors o Crop Science o Soil Science
MOVE
All degree programs (undergraduate and graduate) and courses from the two departments to the proposed new school; including majors, options, minors (undergraduate and graduate), and areas of concentration
COURSE DESIGNATORS
IPSI is proposed as the new course designator
PROPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE
Fall Term 2011
3
CSS and HORT are two of Oregon State University’s largest academic units (Appendix 1). The CSS
faculty is housed in four on-campus buildings, at Eastern Oregon University (EOU), in thirteen
counties, and at fiveOSU Experiment Stations across Oregon. The Horticulture faculty has
programs in 28 of the 36 Oregon counties, at four branch stations, and on the Corvallis campus.
Professorial and professional faculty, classified staff, and graduate students conduct research,
teaching, extension and service activities within Oregon, across the United States, and around the
world. Through statewide research, extension, and teaching programs, CSS and HORT faculty are
directly involved with nursery and greenhouse, field, forage, fruit and nut, seed, and
vegetablecrops that account for 75% of Oregon’s $4.1 billion agricultural industry. HORT faculty
members also work with Oregon’s landscape and turf industries, and Master and community
gardeners. Emphasis is placed on designing, constructing, and managing community and
privatelandscapes with appropriate ornamental, native and food plants that provide ecosystem
services forhomes, cities, municipalities, watersheds, parks, golf courses, gardens and arboreta,
streamside gardens, restoration sites, green roofs and bioswales. Soils faculty do extensive work
with the Natural Resource Conservation Service, US Forest Service and other federal agencies.
Many other faculty members work with soil and water conservation groups across the state. The
two departments also house the majority of the small farms faculty who work with commercial
small farm entrepreneurs, as well as non-commercial small acreage landowners in urban, peri-
urban, and rural communities. In addition to land stewardship, the team addresses alternative and
specialty marketing through creation and enhancement of local and regional food systems, and
farm direct marketing channels.
OSU has the following mission statement: “As a Land Grant institution committed to teaching,
research, and outreach and engagement, Oregon State University promotes economic, social,
cultural and environmental progress for the people of Oregon, the nation and the world. This
mission is achieved by producing graduates competitive in the global economy, supporting a
continuous search for new knowledge and solutions, and maintaining a rigorous focus on academic
excellence, particularly in the three Signature Areas: Advancing the Science of Sustainable Earth
Ecosystems; Improving Human Health and Wellness; and Promoting Economic Growth and Social
Progress.” IPSI will support the missions of OSU and the College of Agricultural Sciences through its
commitment to acquire, synthesize, and disseminate basic and applied knowledge, will serve as a
model, and further enhance the integration of research, extension, and teaching statewide in
matters related to sustainable field and horticultural cropping systems, ecological landscapes, crop
and landscape-related entomology, resilient farm and food systems, and soil resource management
at local, national and international scales. Current and future integrated programs span basic to
applied research with stakeholder engagement; span molecular to landscape level systems; span
research, Extension, and teaching missions; and span biological, ecological, social, and economic
disciplines. The IPSI brings together individuals from a broad set of disciplines in the continuum of
basic and integrative sciences. In addition to traditional agricultural support programs such as
4
production and plant breeding, we have expertise in integrated pest management, biology and
ecology; systems biology; reproductive biology; and ecology. Multidisciplinary working groups are
focused around cropping ecosystems such as field crops, fruits, vegetables, nursery crops, and
wine-grapes. Systems research is increasingly critical to solving problems for Oregonians. IPSI will
also serve as an example for trans-disciplinary research that engages broad academic disciplines
and works jointly with practitioners to solve real-world problems. The creation of new knowledge
in IPSI is anchored directly to people’s lives and livelihoods and connected to practice. IPSI will
create a premier and nationally ranked program that will draw on the strengths of two very strong
nationally recognized OSU programs.
All activities in IPSI will be fully integrated across the three land grant missions – teaching, research,
and extension. There will be two full-time administrative School directors who will have
responsibility for overall School leadership and management (Figure 1). These individuals will work
on all issues cooperatively but each will take the lead for certain aspects of IPSI. There will be an
Executive Council that represents all faculty and staff in IPSI and that will make major policy and
directional decisions. There will be a single curriculum, peer teaching, graduate admissions,
scholarship, promotion and tenure, and other operational committees. IPSI will consist of Program
Areas that reflect areas and possible Centers of Distinction for which we wish to be recognized
nationally and internationally. These program areas will provide for work synergies and
manageable governance units within IPSI but will also encourage interdisciplinarity across the
College and Division.
Figure 1. New School of Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Sciences organizational chart.
IPSI will offer an undergraduate degree of Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Sciences with options in
Agronomy, Plant Breeding and Technology, Sustainable Horticulture Production, Viticulture and
5
Enology, Ecological Landscapes and Urban Forestry, Turf Management, Therapeutic Horticulture,
Soil Science, and Insect Biology and Management. IPSI will continue to offer graduate majors in
Crop Science, Horticulture and Soil Science and a minor in Entomology.
c. Course of study: proposed curriculum, including course numbers, titles, and credit hours.
All CSS and Horticulture degrees and options will be terminated. The following cladogram lists the
IPSI degrees that will be offered:
Proposed Curriculum
Undergraduate
The proposed Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Science undergraduate curriculum is outlined in
Appendix 2. We have designed the new major around the wide range of courses already offered by
other departments in developing the initial curricular requirements (Figure 2). A new class
designator will be used. IPSI has been proposed. Classes with a new designation will be posted in
the on-line catalog system as soon as approval for the transition is granted.
Graduate
Three distinctive graduate degree majors will continue to be offered in IPSI: Crop Science,
Horticulture, and Soil Science. The existing Entomology graduate program will become a stand-
alone Entomology minor. The proposed graduate coursework can be found in Appendix 3.
Manner in which the program will be delivered: including program location (if offered outside of
the main campus), course scheduling, and the use of technology (for both on-campus and off-
campus delivery).
6
The proposed merger will largely incorporate the existing modes of delivery:
Classroom lectures. This traditional approach is often enhanced through digital projection
and audiovisual devices.
Laboratories and recitations. These modes enable and facilitate hands-on and experiential
learning.
Blended audience courses. Undergraduate and/or graduate students and practitioners will
learn together in the same course.
On-line courses and curricula. Currently over 25 courses are available on-line. An entire
online general B.S. in Horticulture is now available.
Seminar- and team-based classes. Seminars featuring work by extension personnel,
research faculty, and graduate students from IPSI and invited guest speakers take place
weekly throughout the school year and are open to the public. Endowment funds are
available to sponsor outside speakers.
Extension related activities. These activities include the Master Gardener program, the
Small Farms program, the Oak Creek Center for Urban Horticulture, the Agricultural
Composting Resources and Education Series, and the Organic Agriculture program.
Outreach related activities. These activities include interactions with commercial and
industrial agriculture and the general public by members of IPSI at local, regional and
national levels. Also included are training sessions, farm fairs, community fairs, etc.
Outreach is provided via internet web pages that provide information and tools for both
urban and rural clients.
IPSI student clubs. IPSI will host the BugZoo, Crop Science Club, Soils Graduate Student
Club, Horticulture Club, Organic Growers’ Club, Landscape Club, Turfgrass Club, and Soil
Judging Club.
Workshops and field days. County extension and branch experiment station faculty
throughout the state hold many workshops and field days throughout the year. These
activities are open to the public. A number of workshops are conducted in Spanish.
Internships. All students in IPSI are required to complete an internship that allows them to
work with industry, community or other governmental partners. Internships are completed
under the 410 blanket and vary between six and twelve hours.
Service Learning. Experiential learning is merged with community service in a number of
classes and in club activities
The proposed curriculum will continue and enhance the long-standing focus in Plant, Soil, and
Insect Science-related curricula for field-based, experiential learning where students are exposed to
materials and problems in a real-world context. This approach promotes active learning and
provides a key context for material learned from other sources. It includes field trips as integral
components of courses at all levels, as well as designated field experience and field courses.
7
d. Ways in which the program will seek to assure quality, access, and diversity.
IPSI faculty have taken active steps to assure program quality including the following:
Learning outcomes. Assuring that course work addresses the following learning outcomes: 1)
Identify with career, 2) Recognize role of profession in society, 3) Embody concept of life-long
learning, 4) Basic academic success skills, 5) Communicate effectively, 6) Career preparation, 7)
Discipline-specific knowledge and skills, 8) Higher-order thinking skills, 9) Community service and
10) Personal development. More detailed information on learning outcomes can be found is
Appendix 4.
Providing peer assessment of all those teaching (Appendix 5). These assessments are
performed every three years for non-tenured faculty and every five years for tenured faculty.
The goals of the assessment are 1) to evaluate the teaching program of individual instructors
including course design (e.g., course content, objectives, syllabus, organization, methods and
materials for delivering instruction), grading and examinations, relationship to overall
curriculum objectives (including themes and skills appropriate to the courses), classroom
presentation, and rapport with students, and 2) to provide insight into, and context for, results
from student evaluations.
Tracking student evaluations. Class student evaluations and the Student and Citizen Evaluation
of Teaching (SET/CET) forms are reviewed each term by the departmental leadership. Feedback
is provided to each instructor as to ways improvements might be achieved.
Industry alignment and relevancy. The ties that IPSI has to the agricultural industry in the state
allows for constant feedback on the training of our students. All students are required to have
an internship experience which also results in feedback on our students’ formal training. Most
of the students graduating from the two units merging into IPSI find well-paying jobs locally or
regionally in their specific field of study. The synergic relationship between IPSI faculty and
industry, NGOs and other governmental agencies will allow the proposed School to align training
of our students with the needs of these groups.
Access to the program is both wide and deep. More than $120,000in scholarships will be available
to new and continuing students on an annual basis. These funds are derived from endowments,
long-time annual gifts and annual contributions.
Due to the fact that much of our work is hands-on activities in fields, greenhouses and laboratories,
there are many opportunities for employment within IPSI both during the school year and summer.
Over 50 students are employed during the school year and more than 125 typically work on a full
time basis for faculty during the summer.
IPSI has strong ties to community colleges offering programs in agriculture. Formal matriculation
agreements are in place. Students can attend local community colleges and take course work
toward an OSU College of Agricultural Sciences’ major. The community colleges that offer such
courses include Treasure Valley CC in Ontario, Blue Mountain CC in Pendleton, Chemeketa CC in
Salem, Dallas, Yamhill Valley, Woodburn, and Brooks, Klamath CC in Klamath Falls, Lane CC in
8
Eugene, Clackamas CC in Oregon City, Mt. Hood CC, Gresham, Portland CC in Portland, and Linn-
Benton CC in Corvallis and Albany.
Place bound students can take classes via the internet through the Extended Campus program
(Ecampus). More than 25 classes are available on an array of topics. An E-campus general B.S. in
Horticulture is also now available.
The diversity of people within our program is consistent with other programs at OSU (Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of students in IPSI, Fall 2010.
OSU-UG OSU-Grad IPSI-UG IPSI-Grad
International 4% 20% 6% 23%
Students of color 18% 12% 9% 33%
Women 47% 48% 40% 54%
Oregon residents 78% 40% 81% 41%
Source: http://oregonstate.edu/admin/aa/ir/sites/default/files/enroll-fall-2010.pdf
Programs and opportunities are available to students for international study. Programs in which
IPSI students have been involved in recent years include the following:
The E.R. Jackman Internship Support Program (provides financial assistance to students in
low-paying or volunteer internships).
Summer and Fall 2010: Nicaragua, Directed Study and Research
Guatemala, Long Way Home Organization Intern
Fall 2008: Christchurch, New Zealand, Crop Research Assistant
Summer 2008: AGRA for West Africa, Ghana
The NAU 2 + 2 Program in cooperation with Nanjing Agricultural University in China.
Chinese students study their first two years in China and then finish their last two years at
OSU. OSU students will be sent to Nanjing Agricultural University in their last two years.
The first two Chinese students started at OSU in 2009.
Many of our ‘students’ include adult learners who are served by our extension and outreach
efforts. Examples of a few programs specifically targeted to diverse and ethnic audiences include:
League of Women Farmers in southern Oregon; Immigrant and Refugee Farmer Training in the
Portland Metropolitan Area; Willamette Valley and Mid-Columbia pesticide applicator and/or tree
fruit and nursery production and management training for Hispanics; Spanish speaking sessions at
the Hermiston Farm Fairs and the Far West Show in Portland, and a cooperative Spanish-language
pesticide users program with the University of Idaho in the Treasure Valley.
9
e. Anticipated fall term headcount and FTE enrollment over each of the next five years.
This proposal integrates the curricula of two current B.S. degrees; our estimate of future
enrollment is based on recent history (Table 2). The median numbers for undergraduates and
graduates over the past six years have been 166 and 55, respectively.
Table 2. Fall enrollment trends for CSS and Horticulture over the past six years.
Undergraduate Student Headcount Graduate Student Headcount
CSS Hort Total Majors Minors Crops Soils Hort Ent* Total
2010 35 125 160 51 18 13 25 11 67
2009 41 99 140 64 20 13 17 1 51
2008 31 100 131 35 16 10 23 1 50
2007 34 93 127 36 15 12 22 0 49
2006 40 99 139 26 13 19 26 1 59
2005 40 103 143 16 16 17 27 4 63
* Entomology
Source: Departments of CSS and HORT.
The enrollment of undergraduate students in the proposed IPSI is expected to follow a linear trend
over the next five years (Table 3). Graduate enrollment is expected to increase slightly over the
present number of 57 students.
Table 3. Expected fall-term enrollment for undergraduates and graduates for
each of the next five years.
AY 2006-10 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Undergraduates 171 215 226 237 248 259
Graduates 57 57 58 59 61 62
Total 228 273 284 296 309 321
f. Expected degrees/certificates produced over the next five years.
Over the next five years, it is expected that the number of undergraduates and graduates
completing a degree in IPSI will remain constant at about 32 and 17, respectively (Table 4).
Table 4. Expected degree completion for each of the next five years by
undergraduates and graduates, respectively.
AY 2006-10 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Undergraduates 32 32 32 33 33 33
Graduates 17 17 17 18 18 18
Total 49 49 49 51 51 51
10
g. Characteristics of students to be served: resident/nonresident/international; traditional/nontraditional; full-time/part-time; etc.
The B.S. in IPSI degree will serve students wishing to become agricultural and science practitioners
as well as educators, policy makers, and entrepreneurs. The degree program will primarily serve
resident students with an interest in local food systems, food security and ecosystem service work.
Many students will be from California due to the increasing limited access to their state schools.
Maintaining a visible farming, cropping, soil, and insect systems program will enable the new
School to attract more out-of-state students. It is anticipated that there will be significant numbers
of nonresident students who will access coursework online. Many of the latter will be
nontraditional students, including single parents and students returning to school after an
extended absence. Due to the mix of course types and the number of courses available online,
there is potential for development of a hybrid curriculum. In such a program, students could access
introductory coursework through a dual enrollment program, or through E-Campus. They would
then access the upper division courses and internship/research opportunities while in residence.
h. Adequacy and quality of faculty delivering the program.
Student evaluation of teaching (SET)
SET scores for the two merging units are in general at or above College levels. Scores are available
upon request.
Awards received by faculty
Faculty within in the two existing units have received numerous national and international awards
and recognition. A synthesizes of the types of awards received by faculty in 2009 and 2010 is
shown in table 5 below.
Table 5. Awards and recognition of faculty in merging units in 2009 and 2010.
Awarding Group
Number of awards
Alberta B. Johnston Award
1 American Pomological Society
3
American Society for Horticultural Science
2 American Society of Agronomy
5
American Society of Enology and Viticulture
1
Arnold and Gerry Appleby
1 City of Portland
1
College of Agricultural Sciences
9 CSREES
1
Entomological Society of America: Pacific Branch
2 Epsilon Sigma Phi
2
Extension Mid-Managers Conference
2 eXtension Review Committee
1
11
Awarding Group
Number of awards
Forest Service
1 International Society for Horticultural Science
3
L.L. Stewart
1 Multi-state research group “Water Management and Quality for Ornamental Crop Production and Health”
1
National Association of County Agricultural Agent - Sustainable Agriculture USDA SARE/NACAA
8
National Golf Course Superintendents Association of America
1 Ontario Oregon Chamber of Commerce
1
Oregon Farm Bureau
1 Oregon Invasive Species Council for GardenSmart Oregon
1
Oregon Organic Coalition
2
Oregon State University
6 OSU College of Agricultural Sciences
7
OSU Division of Outreach and Engagement
1 OSU Extension Association
4
OSU University Continuing Education Association (UCEA)
1 Potato Association of America
6
SCRI eXtension Proposal Panel
1 USDAAPHIS
3
USDA-ARS
1 Western Apicultural Society
1
Western Region Land Grants
1
Total 88
i. Faculty resources.
Faculty head count number and FTE in IPSI are shown in table 6. Vitas are available on request.
Ours will be a large unit. We have a diverse faculty with ranks of many types, which adds strength
to our unit.
Table 6. Faculty head count and FTE within IPSI for fall 2011, both on and off campus.
Category
Number
On-campus
Number
Off-campus
Total
number
FTE On-
campus
FTE Off-
campus
Full Professor 17 13 30 15.02 12.75 Assoc. Professor 13 20 33 12.24 19.55 Asst. Professor 18 12 30 14.65 11.75 Instructor 15 10 25 11.83 8.08 Sub total 63 55 118 53.74 52.13
12
Category
Number
On-campus
Number
Off-campus
Total
number
FTE
On-campus
FTE
Off-campus
Senior Faculty Research Asst. 12 5 17 10.55 4.50
Faculty Research Asst. 20 7 27 18.20 6.00
Postdoc 10 10 10.00
Research Assoc. 6 6 3.60
Professional Faculty 19 19 17.98
Classified 31 31 30.50
Sub total 98 12 110 90.83 10.50
Emeritus 43
43
Adjunct 5
5
Affiliated 28
28
Courtesy 23
23
Sub total 99
99
Total 260 67 327 144.57 62.63
Source: Department of Crop and Soil Science and Department of Horticulture.
j. Other staff
Support Staff
IPSI has a Head Undergraduate Advisor who coordinates the advising in each of the options. The
advisor also tracks and updates advising materials and student files; completes graduation audits;
interacts with off-campus partners in internship programs; communicates with community college
advisors about the completion and transfer of lower division courses, coordinates advising and
orientation activities in the summer; and coordinates undergraduate activities (general advising
meetings, awards ceremonies, coordination of awards nominations, etc.).An additional half-time
advisor provides advising and related activities for the online B.S. in general Horticulture and back-
up for the head advisor. A faculty advisor is often assigned to each undergraduate student to help
them chart their curricular course, to provide contacts for jobs and internships, and to provide
advice on employment and graduate school opportunities.
One professional faculty member (office manager and executive assistant) and four other classified
staff will provide office and human resource support for IPSI. We have six farm staff (professional
and classified positions) and a computing and web staff of six (three on partial appointments).
Finance and accounting support is provided through the Agriculture and Marine Science Business
Center with some centralized human resource support.
k. Facilities, library, and other resources.
Existing classrooms and laboratories available to the Department of Horticulture and the
Department of Crop and Soil Science and other CAS units on campus generally meet the needs for
course delivery. As the School offers more blended and distance learning opportunities, additional
13
technological improvements will have to be made to meet these needs. However, like many OSU
facilities, deferred maintenance is sorely needed. The oldest of facilities in use is over 50 years old
and the newest is over 20 years old.
In addition to regular classroom and laboratory facilities, IPSI has faculty at Extension offices in 32 of
Oregon’s 36 counties and at nine Experiment Stations across the state - Central Oregon Agriculture
Research Center, Columbia Basin Agricultural Research Center, Food Innovation Center Experiment
Station, Hermiston Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Klamath Basin Research and
Extension Center, Malheur Experiment Station, Mid-Columbia Agricultural Research and Extension
Center, North Willamette Research Extension Center, and Southern Oregon Research and Extension
Center. Students are often employed at these off-campus facilities during the summer and
graduates students can have cooperative research projects with faculty on- and off- campus.
Four near-campus farms are part of IPSI - Hyslop Field Research Farm, East Farm Complex, Lewis
Brown Farm, and the Woodhall Vineyard. See section 7b for information about the Oak Creek
Center for Urban Horticulture and the proposed Center for Virtual Agriculture.
l. Anticipated start date.
Fall Term, 2011
2. Relationship to Mission and Goals
a. Manner in which the proposed program supports the institution’s mission and goals: for access; student learning; research; and/or scholarly work; and service.
IPSI reflects OSU’s mission of a comprehensive, fully integrated program. IPSI has very strong
collaborations with industry and state and federal agencies and colleagues across the region and
nation. IPSI promotes economic, social, cultural, and environmental progress for the people of
Oregon, and outside the state, through its commitment to a four ‘legged’ program: teaching,
research, extension, and outreach and engagement.
See other sections of this document for information on access (1e), student learning (1d), research/
scholarship (5d) and service (vitas available on request).
b. Manner in which the proposed program contributions to the Oregon University System goals: for access, quality learning; knowledge creation and innovation; and economic and cultural support of Oregon and its communities.
IPSI will contribute to the OUS goals in the following ways:
We will model blended learning opportunities with practitioners and students.
Statewide faculty members will collaborate with our university, community and industry
partners to provide educational opportunities about the importance and roles of food and
essential plant production and insect management to the people of Oregon.
We will model contemporary Web 2.0 technologies for authentic interactive outreach.
14
Faculty members in IPSI will work with OSU Agriculture in the Classroom, Science and Math
Education, Master Gardener, 4H, SNAP and other OSU, state and federal programs in a
coordinated effort to facilitate learning about food, fiber and ecosystem services.
We will work with our more than 20affiliated commodity commissions and associations to help
coordinate and contribute to their outreach efforts and research agenda.
We will partner and collaborate with SWCD’s, NRCS, Portland Metro, NGO’s, and other agencies
to extend our reach into urban and rural communities.
We will provide “Food 101” workshops for state and federal legislators and their aides.
We will further expand our partnerships with K-12 schools across the state to provide
agricultural science and garden-based curricula and tools. We will offer this delivery system as a
readily available outreach mechanism for those writing NSF, NIH, NIFA and other grants that
require outreach.
IPSI’s research farms and CAS Branch Experiment Stations will experiment with and showcase
effective sustainable living technologies – green roofs, living walls, ecological landscapes, insect
harbors, biomass converters, solar power, etc. especially near urban communities.
c. Manner in which the program meets broad statewide needs: and enhances the state’s capacity to respond effectively to social, economic, and environmental challenges and opportunities.
IPSI envisions that Oregonians and peers across the United States and internationally will recognize
the new School as a premier source of sustainable agronomic and horticultural farm and food
systems and ecological landscapes research; experiential and online learning; and innovative and
compelling outreach and engagement activities for urban, peri-urban and rural citizenry. Activities
within IPSI will result in healthy food production, improved human health and livelihoods,
ecosystem services, and protection of our environment. IPSI has the “unfair” advantage over many
of its peer institutions as our farming, forestry and landscape sectors are in our back yard or
accessible via our branch experiment stations. This enables and provides the continued opportunity
for distinction, and high quality trans- disciplinary and in-field research, and experiential learning.
3. Accreditation
a. Accrediting body or professional society that has established standards in the area in which the program lies, if applicable.
The only certification of professional societies within the program is the Therapeutic Horticulture
Certification, and this is in partnership with Portland Community College. IPSI offers course work
for this certification. Many of the courses offered by IPSI are required for other certifications.
b. Ability of the program to meet professional accreditation standards.
N/A
15
c. Undergraduate program accreditation: if the proposed program is a graduate program in which the institution offers an undergraduate program, proposal should identify whether or not the undergraduate program is accredited and, if not, what would be required to quality it for accreditation.
N/A
d. Steps taken to achieve accreditation: if accreditation is a goal, the proposal should identify the steps being taken to achieve accreditation. If the program is not seeking accreditation, the proposal should indicate why it is not.
N/A
4. Need
a. Evidence of market demand.
Nineteen percent of the civilian labor force of Oregon is farm employment. Roughly ten percent of
state’s revenue is agriculturally based. IPSI teaching, research, extension, and outreach takes place
on campus, at four established farms, four Experiment Stations, and five Research and Extension
Centers throughout the state to meet the need of the industry.
The College has stated that there shall be no daylight between research and Extension. IPSI meets
this provision and extends the principle to complete integration of undergraduate education. The
University has three Signature Areas of Distinction: Advancing the Science of Sustainable Earth
Ecosystems; Improving Human Health and Wellness; and Promoting Economic Growth and Social
Progress. IPSI clearly addresses all three areas with its integrated teaching, research, extension, and
outreach programs.
b. Shared location: if the program’s location is shared with another similar OUS program, proposal should provide externally validated evidence of need (e.g., surveys, focus groups, documented requests, occupational statistics and forecasts).
N/A
c. Improved educational attainment: manner in which the program would serve the need for improved educational attainment in the region and state.
Students across the nation and around the world will recognize IPSI as a leader in sustainable
cropping, soil and insect systems education. This will be achieved in the following ways:
The courses and curricula will be delivered on-campus and across the region via electronic
technologies.
The program will rationalize the number of graduates to the market place so that we maintain
our current, near 100% placement rate.
IPSI will continue to partner with employers to create dynamic experiential learning
opportunities and internships that also give employers an opportunity to “test drive” students.
16
IPSI will offer upper-level and graduate classes for students, practitioners and the curious, for
university credit, continuing education credit and simple knowledge enhancement.
Service learning will be a backbone of the program.
IPSI will continue to provide scholarship monies to those in need.
Articulation between community colleges and IPSI will continue.
d. Manner in which the program would address the civic and cultural demands of citizenship.
The Oak Creek Center for Urban Horticulture, which has programs and demonstrations include
the Green Roof, Green Tower, High Tunnels, Honey Bee Research, Living Fence, OSU Student
Organic Garden, and Permaculture.
Organic farming programs and demonstrations.
The experiment and extension stations distributed throughout the state provide for a direct link
to Oregon citizenship and allows for open and fruitful communications.
Service learning provides students with ‘hands-on’ education about the industry.
5. Outcomes and Quality Assessment
a. Expected learning outcomes of the program.
IPSI follows the University learning goals that consist of six categories identified as Academic values;
Basic academic success skills; Career preparation; Discipline-specific knowledge and skills; Higher-
order thinking skills; and Personal development. These learning goals are generally applied to
classroom course work. They can be extended equally well to extension and outreach programs.
b. Methods by which the learning outcomes will be assessed and used to improve curriculum and instruction.
IPSI reviews its undergraduate curriculum yearly by inventorying the course learning outcomes for
each course, identifying core competencies, and recommending changes to the catalog of courses,
including removing existing courses, redesigning or merging existing courses, and designing new
courses.
c. Program performance indicator: including prospects for success of program graduates (employment or graduate school) and consideration of licensure, if appropriate.
Nearly all undergraduate students who seek employment after graduation have multiple job offers
and are able to obtain a job in their area of study. We have more jobs available than we have
graduates. Graduate student enrollment is limited by the number of assistantships that we are able
to generate through grants and contracts. We consistently have more high quality applicants than
available positions. Like our undergraduates, there are more jobs available for graduate students in
most program areas than available students.
d. Nature and level of research and/or scholarly work expected of program faculty: indicators of success in those areas.
17
Nearly all faculty in IPSI have appointments split among teaching, research and extension. All
professorial faculty, as well as some instructors, have a minimum 15% scholarship requirement
(30% maximum) in their position descriptions and are expected to do scholarly work as appropriate
for their position. For those with research appointments, the common output is journal articles,
book chapters, and other similar publications. For those with predominant extension
appointments, extension publications are the most common output. Curricula, web sites, and
electronic tools are other common outputs. As part of annual review and promotion and tenure
processes, faculty are expected to document the impact of their activities. Tens of millions of
dollars of on-the-ground impact are easily documentable every year from faculty work. In recent
National Research Council assessment of PhD programs, our units ranked at or above national
averages for criteria related to scholarship.
Grant support: IPSI brought in 17.4% of the $55,243,472 awards received by the College of
Agricultural Sciences in 2010. For FY 2010-2011, combined grants and contracts for the two
departments, currently makes up 33% of the College of Agricultural Sciences awards to date.
Plant patents: Clearfield wheat varieties have been the number one royalty income source for
OSU for at least the last three years. Royalty income is and will continue to be generated from
varieties of potatoes, strawberries, hazelnut, ornamentals and other crops bred by IPSI
faculty.
6. Program integration and collaboration
a. Closely related programs in other OUS universities and Oregon private institutions.
As indicated in other document sections, we have direct ties with community college programs
across the state as well as with Eastern Oregon University. Many students who come from
community colleges take initial coursework and then transfer into our programs at OSU. We have
direct teaching program ties with Portland Community College for the Therapeutic Horticulture
Program. Our extension faculty in Umatilla County and Wasco Counties are co-located at
community colleges and conduct some combined educational efforts.
b. Complements other programs: ways in which the program complements other similar programs in other Oregon institutions and other related programs at this institution. Proposal should identify the potential for collaboration.
No other OUS universities have programs related to horticulture, crop science, soil science or
applied entomology. As noted, we are actively engaged with community colleges. We are
developing active partnerships with WSU and UI to provide coursework in plant, soil and insects
sciences on a regional basis.
c. No collaboration: if applicable, proposal should state why this program may not be collaborating with existing similar program.
N/A
18
d. Potential impacts: on other programs in the areas of budget, enrollment, faculty workload, and facilities use.
If programs grow significantly, there will be increased need for timely offerings of basic to upper
level math and science classes that serve as the foundation for all of our curricular options. As
noted, our facilities are 20 or more years old and updates are needed to allow for newer
educational and current research and extension technologies to be used.
7. Financial Sustainability (attach the completed Budget Outline)
a. Business plan: for the program that anticipates and provides for its long-term financial viability, addressing anticipated sources of funds, the ability to recruit and retain faculty, and the plans for assuring adequate library support over the long term.
As shown in Table 7 below, the two units that will become IPSI had a combined total operational
base of nearly $13 million on a three-year average basis in the period 2007-09. Base support (state
provided funding) for the new School exceeds 7 million in FY11 and total ARF, OSUF and grant and
contract spending parallels that amount. It is anticipated that E&G funding will remain constant or
increase in the FY11-13 biennium. Extension and AES bases may decrease as much as 20%
depending on legislative outcomes. ARF contracts, OSUF current use funds and grant and contract
spending is anticipated to increase in the coming biennium.
Fiscal management in the two units has been sound and it is anticipated that such management will
continue.
Tenured/tenure-track faculty positions in the College of Agricultural Sciences revert to the College
when a position is vacated for any reason other than tenure denial at the unit level. A priority
staffing process within the College has historically been used to fill positions. Both College and unit
resources are used in recruiting well qualified position candidates. Retention is a combined effort of
the unit, College and University based on faculty quality and equity analyses. If AES and Extension
funding decline dramatically due to state budget reductions, retention could become more of an
issue especially if other states are in a better position to hire faculty. OSU administration above the
College level may need to become a greater contributor in maintaining high-performing faculty.
Table 7. CSS and HORT combined operational base for 2007 through 2009.
U&G Base
Extension Base
Experiment Station Base
ARF Contracts
ARF Expenditures
OSU Foundation Current Use
Grant and Contract Awards
Grants and Contracts
Expenditures
CSS 430,775 695,462 3,615,288 1,284,697 1,450,369 680,217 4,867,390 3,014,583
HORT 231,214 640,936 2,029,494 906,576 812,456 768,965 4,700,615 2,551,014
Total 661,989 1,336,398 5,644,782 2,191,273 2,262,825 1,449,182 9,568,005 5,565,597
Base fund total 7,643,169 Expenditures total 9,277,604 Total expenditures 16,920,773
19
b. Unique resources: plans for development and maintenance of unique resources (buildings, laboratories, technology) necessary to offer a quality program in this field.
It is essential that all of our existing facilities in four buildings on campus and at four farms in the
area be upgraded to meet current health, access, and performance standards. Maintenance has
been deferred in all facilities for decades. Emergency repairs have been made as well as some
energy efficiency and computing connectivity upgrades, but facilities in general show their 20-50
year age.
Center for Virtual Agriculture
Given the distribution of our faculty across the state, in order to fully integrate faculty into a School
governance and in order to best utilize faculty time and talents in teaching and outreach activities,
we will need to create and maintain state-of-the-art videoconferencing and other distance
communication technologies. We have submitted a Technology Resource Fee proposal to build a
Center for Virtual Agriculture that could serve as a technology hub for the northwest corner of
campus. While a TRF grant will provide the needed infrastructure, if the Center receives broader
university use, we will need on-going university resources to “person” the facility. We also see this
Center as the first step in creating a true technology learning and educational outreach facility. We
would like to create a room where seamless Skype, Adobe Connect, or other distance
communications can be done to facilitate the participation of individuals from around the world on
graduate student committees and in educational activities. We would like to create a room from
which seamless Webinars can be broadcast. We would like to create a facility where the latest
multimedia technologies can be tested and demonstrated for faculty and student use. All of these
activities will require University funding for infrastructure development and staffing. The proposed
School can guarantee that audiences for our education and outreach products will exist across the
state, region, nation, and world.
Oak Creek Center for Urban Horticulture
The Oak Creek Center for Urban Horticulture (OCCUH) is a student and public learning center just to
the east of 35th Street, north of Western Boulevard, on the OSU campus. It is a showcase for
experimentation and demonstration of sustainable living technologies in an urban environment –
green roofs, living walls, ecological landscapes, insect harbors, biomass converters, solar power, etc.
Efforts are underway to enhance this one-of-a-kind resource. Funding for building repair and
maintenance will be needed. Work is underway to establish an endowment fund to provide student
internships and other student experience opportunities. Some faculty members are already
engaged with community and industrial partners to more fully develop this site as a first-choice
sustainable living learning center for our community.
20
c. Targeted student/faculty ratio – assuming projected student enrollment and need for additional teaching FTE
We anticipate growing the tenure-track faculty FTE to at least six from just over 4 FTE. There will be
approximately 250 undergraduate students, so our targeted student FTE to faculty is 40:1 in the
year 2015 as per table 4 (graduation rate times 4.5 years).
Our combined current student credit hours in FY 9-10 were 7825, so our targeted student credit
hours to faculty FTE should exceed1200:1.
d. Resources to be devoted to student recruitment.
As noted elsewhere, a significant number of scholarships will be available to students studying in
IPSI. These funds will be used and School faculty will continue to pursue university and College level
scholarship and fellowship funds to recruit a diverse group of students to IPSI. The nearly 100% job
placement of our students is an attraction and will further developed as a recruitment tool.
8. External review (if the proposed program is a graduate level program, follow the guidelines provided in External Review of new Graduate Level Academic Programs in addition to completing all of the above information).
Three distinctive graduate degree majors will continue to be offered in IPSI: Crop Science,
Horticulture, and Soil Science. The existing Entomology graduate program will become a stand-
alone Entomology minor.
Unlike some graduate programs on campus, there is no set curriculum for degrees in any of the IPSI
program areas. Student programs are established by the student and their graduate committee. A
typical set of classes is often taken by students studying in a particular area – plant breeding and
genetics, agronomy, applied entomology, horticulture, etc. – but there are no specific requirements
other than participation in graduate student orientation courses, presenting a School seminar as
part of a seminar class, and serving in a teaching assistant capacity for one term.
a. Support from departments and program liaisons.
As the merger of CSS and HORT was proposed administratively within the College of Agricultural
Sciences and OSU, we have not asked for input on the merger from the clientele groups with which
our units interact. These groups have been told that the merger is taking place and what the likely
benefits of the merger will be to them. Given the genesis of the merger proposal, we have not
sought outside letters for inclusion in this CAT I proposal.
b. Liaisons letter of support (Appendix 6).
21
Appendix 1. Organizational charts for a) Crop and Soil Science and b) Horticulture.
a)
b)
22
Appendix 2. Proposed Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Science undergraduate curriculum.
23
24
25
26
27
Appendix 3. Proposed Integrated Plant, Soil, and Insect Science graduate coursework. Corvallis Campus Classes *Class has e-campus alternative
Classes in bold are offered every term
Fall Term Winter Term Spring Term CSS 100- Orientation/Career Planning
CSS 200- Crop Ecology and Morphology
CSS 205- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems* CSS 435- Environmental Soil Physics
(starts Fall 2012)
CSS 463- Seed Biology (alt even yrs)
CSS 366- Wildland Soil Ecosystems
(Cascades campus w/ transmission at
Corvallis)
CSS 407- Seminar
CSS 440/540- Weed Management
CSS 509- Practicum in Teaching CSS 513- Properties, Processes and
Functions of Soils
CSS 535- Soil Physics (Fall 2011, then
alt. even yrs from Fall 2012)
CSS 536- Vadose Zone Hydrology Lab
(no longer offered after Fall 2011)
CSS 547- Nutrient Cycling
CSS 620- DNA Fingerprinting (alt even
yrs)
CSS 621- Genetic Mapping (alt even yrs)
CSS 622- Mapping Quantitative Trait
Loci (alt even yrs)
CSS 635- Advanced Soil Physics (odd
years; begins Fall 2013)
CSS 645- Soil Microbial Ecology (alt
even yrs)
CSS 650- Adv. Plant Breeding &
Qualitative Genetics (alt odd yrs)
CSS 660- Herbicide Science (alt even
yrs)
CSS 468 Soils of Oregon (Sept
2012;annual)
CSS 199- Special Studies: Issues in
Sustainable Ag
CSS 205- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems* CSS 300- Introduction to Crop
Production
CSS 305- Principles of Soil Science^
CSS 330- World Food Crops
CSS 368- Pract. Analysis of Soils
CSS 430/530- Plant Genetics
CSS 431- Plant Genetics Recitation
CSS 455/555- Biology of Soil
Ecosystems
CSS 468-Digital Mapping of Soilscapes
(alt even yrs, from Win 2012)
CSS 509- Practicum in Teaching CSS 523- Principles of Stable Isotopes
(alt even yrs)
CSS 590- Experimental Design in
Agriculture
CSS 6XX- Global Biogeochemical
Cycles (from Win 2012)
CSS 670- Physiology of Crop Yield (alt
even yrs)
CSS 205- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems* CSS 310- Forage Production*
CSS 311- Into to Insect Pest Management
CSS 316- Nutrient Cycling in
Agroecosystems (EOU w/ electronic
delivery to Corvallis)
CSS 325- Ag and Environmental
Predicaments: A Case Study
Approach (WIC)
CSS 438- Exploring World Agriculture
CSS 450/550- Plant Breeding
CSS 460/560- Seed Production
CSS 466/566- Soil Morphology and
Classification
CSS 475- Soil Resource Potentials
CSS 480/580- Case Studies in Cropping
Systems Mgmt.
CSS 499- Special Topics/ Issues in
Organic Farming OR
CSS 4XX- ‘Organic Soil
Agroecosystems’
CSS 509- Practicum in Teaching CSS 525- Mineral-Organic Matter
Interactions
CSS 568-Soil Geomorphology (alt odd
yrs; from Sp 2013)
____________________
^EOU Campus offering
*Class has campus alternative
E-campus classes Classes in bold are offered every term
CSS 205e- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems* CSS 310e- Forage Production*
CSS 311e- Intro to Insect Pest
Management
CSS 330e- World Food Crops CSS 340- Pens and Plows: Writings of
Working the Land
CSS 395e- World Soil Resources CSS 418e- Toxic Plants in PNW Pastures
CSS 440e- Wee Management
CSS 499/599- Special Topics/ Multiple
Titles* CSS 420/520e- Seed Science and
Technology
CSS 205e- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems* CSS 310e- Forage Production*
CSS 330e- World Food Crops CSS 340- Pens and Plows: Writings of
Working the Land
CSS 395e- World Soil Resources
CSS 499/599- Special Topics/ Multiple
Titles* CSS 420/520e- Seed Science and
Technology
CSS 205e- Soils: Sustainable
Ecosystems*
CSS 330e- World Food Crops
CSS 395e- World Soil Resources
CSS 499/599- Special Topics/ Multiple
Titles*
28
Appendix 4. Learning outcomes.
Oregon State University Department of Horticulture
Undergraduate Student Learning Outcomes
The Department of Horticulture’s Curriculum Committee has identified the following as core learning objectives for undergraduate students completing any of the department’s six options.
1. learn, comprehend and apply the language of Horticulture and Horticulture Science
2. understand and be able to manipulate plant growth and development through Horticulture practices
3. observe Horticulture systems, identify assets and liabilities of the systems, form hypotheses and make appropriate recommendations
4. communicate effectively verbally, orally and in writing
5. recognize, understand and be able to use the latest tools and technology relevant to Horticulture
6. identify plants, make appropriate plant recommendations and suggest novel plant uses in specific Horticulture systems
7. identify and explain the role of Horticulture in contemporary social, economic, political and environmental contexts
8. demonstrate proficiency in the basic sciences through applications in Horticulture
9. participate and contribute to society as a Horticulture professional
10. find, analyze and use relevant Horticulture information and resources
11. synthesize knowledge and experience from class, work experience and internships to solve Horticulture problems across many scales
12. analyze Horticulture entities as managed ecosystems
We recognize and expect that individual options will likely emphasize additional learning objectives that are relevant to the option’s specific goals. These objectives constitute a “living” document that should be visited often and revised if necessary. They serve as a guide in the development of individual courses, programs, options and a cohesive curriculum and are a valuable reference as the department faces critical retirement/replacement of core teaching faculty. In addition, they are the foundation of the department’s current learning assessment initiative (in compliance with OSU’s Office of Academic Programs).
29
Appendix 5. IPSI peer assessment.
DEPARTMENT OF CROP AND SOIL SCIENCE FACULTY PEER TEACHING REVIEW PROGRAM
DRAFT RECOMMENDATION 11-12-01 The faculty of the Department view excellence in teaching as an integral component in our Department’s success. Accordingly, we believe that all of our faculty can benefit from periodic review and assessment of their teaching effort. The primary focus of the peer-review of teaching is to ensure that our courses compel higher-level learning for our students.
Goals and Intent
Peer teaching evaluation is intended to be a positive, constructive experience for the instructor and should be conducted fairly and with a spirit of collegiality.
Peer teaching evaluation has a role in both formative and summative teaching evaluation (Keig and Waggoner 1994).
Formative evaluation: evaluation intended to improve teaching. Summative evaluation: evaluation that functions in decision making relative to P&T and
compensation (required in OSU guidelines for P&T). Goals of peer teaching evaluation:
1. To evaluate the teaching program of individual instructors including course design (e.g., course content, objectives, syllabus, organization, methods and materials for delivering instruction), grading and examinations, relationship to overall curriculum objectives (including themes and skills appropriate to the courses), classroom presentation, and rapport with students.
2. To provide insight into and context for results from other forms of evaluation (e.g., student evaluations).
3. To foster interaction among faculty: 4. To recognize the efforts and dedication of departmental teaching faculty work
collaboratively to assess teaching and assist in improvement of teaching. faculty. Serving as peer evaluators may require a significant time commitment. Those who serve on peer evaluation committees should provide time for doing so and be rewarded for their efforts by the department head.
Frequency of Evaluation All faculty teaching regularly scheduled courses should experience peer teaching evaluation.
This includes courtesy faculty. The entire teaching program (all courses that are taught by an instructor) should be evaluated. The teaching program of non-tenured faculty should undergo peer evaluation every three years.
Most non-tenured faculty would experience evaluation twice prior to P&T. A principal purpose of the first evaluation is to identify, well in advance of evaluation for P&T, areas of teaching that need improvement.
The teaching program of tenured faculty should undergo evaluation at least every 5 years. The Department Head will maintain and distribute an annual schedule to ensure that faculty can
adequately prepare for review.
30
Peer Evaluation Committee A Peer Evaluation Committee will be appointed by the Department Head. This standing
committee will consist of three to five faculty members, each of whom will serve staggered, three-year terms.
Ad hoc peer review committees will be formed for each faculty member being evaluated. Each ad hoc committee will consist of two members of the Peer Evaluation Committee and one or two additional members as needed to ensure subject matter expertise. The additional members may come from other departments.
Procedure for Conducting Peer Teaching Evaluations The peer evaluation consists of two parts: examination of instructional materials and classroom
visitations. Examination of instructional materials:
1. The instructor provides to the committee a summary of the teaching program that includes: (i) an instructor's narrative consisting of the instructor's personal teaching philosophy, course descriptions, course objectives, relationship with other courses in the department (prerequisites, subsequent courses, etc.), description of methods and approach for delivering instructional materials, expected outcomes, recent changes in content and methods and recent efforts in teaching development, and comments and concerns relevant to evaluation, (ii) syllabi, (iii) reading list/text(s), (iv) examples of course handouts and/or website information, (v) a sample of exams and problem sets, and (vi) grade distributions. The Department provides a compilation of student evaluations for all courses taught in the last 5 years. Peer evaluation can provide insight into and context for results of student evaluations and suggest whether students and the instructor are "connecting." (Adapted from Seldin, 1985; University of Missouri, 1992).
2. Members of the committee review the teaching summary and meet as a group to discuss the instructor's teaching program. A list of possible questions for consideration by the committee is attached (Attachment I). The committee should identify the strengths of the program, areas for improvement, and formulate questions on aspects of the program that are unclear.
3. The committee meets with the instructor to discuss, clarify, and expand the materials summarizing the teaching program. Every effort should be made to keep the tone of the meeting positive and constructive. An oral summary of the committee's reaction to the teaching program should be presented to the instructor. Strengths of the program should be discussed and areas for improvement should be suggested. Suggestions for improvement are recommendations for the instructor's consideration. Questions that arose at the previous meeting of the review committee should be discussed with the instructor.
Classroom visitations: o Done properly, visitation by peers demands a good deal of time and can be very useful to
help improve teaching. In-class components must be part of peer evaluation within the OSU guidelines for Tenure and Promotion. Therefore, peer evaluation of untenured professors and those seeking promotion is essential. Classroom visitation can be helpful in resolving discrepancies between student evaluations and the perception of the peer
31
evaluation. 1. 1–The committee will meet with the instructor prior to coordinate classroom
visits. One or more of the instructor’s classes will be visited. Each class that is visited will be visited at least twice. All committee members will do at least one classroom evaluation. Guidelines for evaluation of classroom visitation are attached (Attachment II).
2. 2–After the visitations the committee and instructor meet to discuss strengths/weaknesses, etc. Videotapes of selected lectures may be made for use by the instructor and/or committee.
The Review Document The ad hoc committee will develop a written evaluation for consideration by the Peer Evaluation
Committee. Based on this draft the Peer Evaluation Committee will prepare a consensus review letter to be submitted to the Department Head.
A copy of the evaluation(s) will be provided to the instructor who may respond to it in writing. Both the peer evaluation and the instructor's responses must be considered in summative evaluation.
References Keig, L., and M.D. Waggoner. 1994. Collaborative Peer Review: The Role of Faculty in Improving College Teaching. ASHE-
ERIC Higher Education Reports. The George Washington University, Washington, DC.
The University of Missouri. 1992. Teaching Evaluation
Seldin, P. 1985. Changing Practices in Faculty Evaluation. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
Attachment I
Guidelines For Reviewing The Teaching Summary (Adapted from Seldin, 1985 & University Missouri, 1992) Course Content
Is it up-to-date? Is the treatment balanced and fair? If appropriate, are conflicting views presented? Are the breadth and depth of coverage appropriate? Has the instructor mastered the subject matter? Is the coverage responsive to the needs of students? Is it relevant to the discipline?
Course Objectives Are the objectives clearly communicated to the students? Are they consistent with overall curricular objectives? Does the course incorporate the appropriate themes and skills? Are in-class and out-of-class work appropriately balanced? Does the instructor encourage students to think for themselves?
Course Organization Is the syllabus current and relevant to the course objectives? Is the course outline logical? Are the lecture, laboratory, or other assignments integrated? Should they be? Is the time devoted to each topic appropriate?
32
Assignments Do assignments supplement lectures discussions, labs, and field work? Do assignments reflect and support course objectives? Are they appropriate for the level of student? Is adequate time given to complete the assignments? Is it consistent with expected quality? Are the assignments challenging to the students?
Grading and Examinations Are exams suitable to content and course objectives? Are exams representative of course content? Are exams clearly written? Are exams fairly graded? Are grading standards made clear to the students?
Interest in Teaching Does the instructor discuss teaching with colleagues? Does the instructor seek advice from others and participate in teaching-related workshops and committees? Is the instructor sought out by others on teaching-related matters? Is the instructor knowledgeable about current developments in teaching?
Instructor Concerns Are the instructors concerns about evaluation well-founded? Are the instructor's needs for course improvement well-founded?
Attachment II
Faculty/Instructor Name ______________________________________ Class course and number ______________________________________ Class Topic ______________________________________ Date __________________
Crop and Soil Science Dept., Oregon State University Teaching Evaluation Feedback Form
Please answer the following questions regarding instructor performance. No ability = O; Outstandingability = 4. NA if the statement does not apply.
Relating the subject Ability
1. The teacher provided a learning objective for today’s class.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
2. The teacher taught the material which he/she promised to teach.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
3. The teacher used language appropriate for the student’s level.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
4. The teacher presented information that is current and relevant
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
Comments:
Delivering the information
33
5. The teacher presented information in a logical manner.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
6. Teaching aids - videos, overheads, the internet - were useful and relevant.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
7. The teacher encouraged students to think of solutions to problems.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
8. The teacher used appropriate pacing for different portions of the presentations
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
Comments:
Relating to the students
9. The teacher listened to class members. N/A 0 1 2 3 4
10. The teacher answered questions from class members N/A 0 1 2 3 4
11. The teacher checked for student understanding throughout the class.
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
12. The teacher provides opportunities for more extensive discussion of course material (either in and/or out of class).
N/A 0 1 2 3 4
Comments:
Overall teaching ability
13. Overall rating of teacher’s performance? N/A 0 1 2 3 4
Comments:
34
Appendix 6. Liaisons letters of support.
