Off point? As I understand AACSB International accreditation "PQ faculty bring significant professional experience to the classroom." Do you presume that learning and teaching happens only in the classroom? I claim that PQ people have to demonstrate participation in and leadership of learning organizations every working hour. PQ means or should mean that the PQ faculty member demonstrated the ability to foster learning in the work environment? Further, what worth is a PQ if they cannot convey their experience to students on campus. Accordingly, their mark of competence is business results, staff development results and personal best results.
FWIW, I conclude from a quick review of the AACSB material that the assessment method is subjective and non-validating. Makes it quite difficult, methinks, to assure stakeholders that business schools:
• Manage resources to achieve a vibrant and relevant mission.
• Advance business and management knowledge through faculty scholarship.
• Provide high-caliber teaching of quality and current curricula.
• Cultivate meaningful interaction between students and a qualified faculty.
• Produce graduates who have achieved specified learning goals.
Thanks for your time.
Jack Ring
On May 31, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Carolyn Fausnaugh wrote:
> This conversation may be off point. Professionally Qualified is a designation of AACSB accreditation. Instructors can be academically qualified - that is publishing and other academic activities or professionally qualified - under the AACSB qualifications. Teaching performance is a different aspect - under AACSB.
>
> Go to
>
http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/business/std_faq1.asp
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Management Education and Development Discussion [
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jack Ring [
jring@AMUG.ORG]
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 1:12 PM
> To:
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
> Subject: Re: Looking for additional PQ (Professionally Qualified) criteria
>
> Prof. Saner-Yiu,
>
> Thank you. Your first point is important. The criteria should address not only the person's professional growth but also their contribution to growth by others.
>
> I will add that the criteria Charlie posted are concerned with activities (i.e., gerunds). Should not Professional Criteria hinge on results?
>
> Also, we all should consider whether specifying criteria is sufficient or must we specify a method of assessment, e.g., a) minimizes false positives and false negatives, b) includes retrospective verification of assessments, etc.?
>
> I am interested in this topic because I am leading an effort to articulate criteria for selecting among various competency models for technical professionals.
>
> Onward,
> Jack Ring
>
>
> On May 31, 2010, at 6:43 AM, Prof. Lichia Saner-Yiu wrote:
>
> Dear Charlie, Dear All,
>
> This is a very interesting list of qualification proposed by Charlie.
>
> What strikes me is the omission from this criteria list concerning the core function of teaching. To teach, entails the ability to instruct and to facilitate learning. To be a high achiever and meet all the criteria do not necessarily translate into ability to motivate, to structure the lessons plans (perhaps all automated by the publishing houses?) and to facilitate critical reflection of the students. Without these quality or competence of the teacher, students tend to stuck in the “information” rich, understanding poor and application by imitation mode.
>
> Second point of the list strikes me is the equal weight of these 8 criteria. Is that so? Shouldn’t we consider a more common and differentiated weighting scheme for professors with different responsibility and teaching different topics?
>
> Just a few thoughts about this exercise. Be interested to follow the unfolding discussion and contributions.
>
> Best,
>
> Lichia
>
> Prof. Lichia Saner-Yiu, Ed.D.
> Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development
> CP 1498, Mont Blanc, 1211 Geneva 1, Switzerland
> Tel. +41-22-906-1720, Fax. +41-22-738-1737
> Web:
www.csend.org<http://www.csend.org> (development),
www.adequate.org<http://www.adequate.org> (quality)
>
www.diplomacydialogue.org<http://www.diplomacydialogue.org> (multistakeholder interactions)
>
> Effective M&E system strengthens aid performance! Adopt ISO 10015+ monitoring system for results!
>
>
> From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Henry
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 1:23 PM
> To:
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU<mailto:
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
> Subject: Re: Looking for additional PQ (Professionally Qualified) criteria
>
> Charlie
> We are also looking at our criteria for PQ facutly.
> Can you send me any input you received and your final set of criteria?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike
>
>
> Mike Henry
> Associate Dean
> School of Business
> Grant MacEwan University
>
http://academic.macewan.ca/henrym/
> Twitter - mikehenry1
>
>
> 5-306h,
> 10700 - 104 Ave.
> Edmonton, AB Canada T5J 4S2
> 780-497-5147
>
>
>
>
>
>>>> On 4/30/2010 at 10:35 AM, in message <
62C33E0D6095DB41A5F9C2D578BACC86AED8E101D6@EXCHANGEDB1.lmumain.edu<mailto:
62C33E0D6095DB41A5F9C2D578BACC86AED8E101D6@EXCHANGEDB1.lmumain.edu>>, "Vance, Charles M." <
Charles.Vance@LMU.EDU<mailto:
Charles.Vance@LMU.EDU>> wrote:
> We are finalizing our criteria for Professional Qualification (PQ) assessment of our faculty. Below are the criteria that we have so far. Are any of you using any additional criteria (e.g., fitting #9 below)? We would like to have as extensive a list as possible so as to not unnecessarily shut out great part-time faculty (a great case of the tail wagging the dog!). I'd appreciate any additional input for PQ criteria that you (with AACSB in mind) are using. Thanks! -Charlie
>
> 1. Maintaining professional certification.
> 2. Participation in professional associations and meetings.
> 3. Publication of articles in practitioner journals.
> 4. Publication of academic or practitioner book.
> 5. Outreach or consulting related to the individual's primary teaching area.
> 6. Serving on the board of a public company.
> 7. Serving as an officer of a national or regional association related to the primary teaching area.
> 8. Completion of additional courses or professional development work related to the primary teaching area.
> 9. Other relevant continuing involvement.
>
> Charles M. Vance, Ph.D.
> College of Business Administration
> Loyola Marymount University
> 1 LMU Drive, MS 8385
> Los Angeles, CA 90045-2659
> Phone: 310-338-4508
> FAX: 310-338-3000
>
cvance@lmu.edu<mailto:
cvance@lmu.edu>