1. The foundation of Dr. Kim's Teaching Philosophy
Traditionally, the majority of young women from her small South Korean village began working at the local factories after middle school. It was assumed that she, too, would follow that path, but her English teacher, Mr. Cho, persuaded her parents and older village relatives that, though a female, she was capable of having a highly successful professional career. Thanks to Mr. Cho's insistence, she became the first female from her village to attend high school and earn a college degree. Dr. Kim chose to attend a college with an education program because of Mr. Cho’s example – and the difference his commitment made in her life. After working diligently to complete her college degree, she taught English in Korea for ten years.

Initially in 2000, she came to the United States to complete her dissertation for her Korean PhD. While she was in another PhD program in 2001 — to extend her visa — she met a Ghanaian teacher and mentor, Dr. Kofi Marfo,at the University of South Florida. Because of her interest in creativity, he suggested she attend the University of Georgia (UGA) and study under Dr. Torrance. In 2002, shortly after beginning her PhD program in educational psychology at UGA, she met two highly influential people who became her mentors, Drs. E. Paul Torrance and Bonnie Cramond at the Torrance Center. Dr. Torrance, who is commonly considered The Father of Creativity, inspired her to become "The Granddaughter of Creativity (they share the same birthday!)." Dr. Cramond helped her evolve from a student to a scholar.

Upon earning her PhD from UGA, she accepted a position at Eastern Michigan University (EMU). She was informed, “EMU produces the most and the best teachers in the U.S.” Effective instruction, by investing in education professionals’ proper training, was valued at EMU which aligned with her Confucian cultural background and evolving professional abilities. (In Confucian cultures, the teaching profession is highly regarded.) At EMU, she learned an enormous amount about teaching within American culture from her students and mentors, Drs. Alane Starko (who had already been the author of one of the best creativity books for teachers) and Kathleen Beauvais (who became Dr. Kim's children's Grandma B).

Dr. Kim's desire to work within a Gifted Center led her to her employment as an Assistant Professor in 2008 at The College of William & Mary (WM) and as an Associate Professor in 2011. She found a mentor and colleague, Dr. Bruce Bracken, who helped her maximize her strengths and overcome her cultural differences from the students and other colleagues in WM's predominantly White student and faculty body. Dr. Bracken is also a UGA alumni (M.A. '77 & PhD '79), was Dr. Torrance's graduate assistant, and was the 2012 Lifetime Achievement Alumni Award winner from UGA's College of Education. Dr. Kim feels that her life and opportunities would have been impossible without the teachers and mentors who selflessly taught and supported her throughout her journey. Therefore, she has pledged to pass on the knowledge and skills that were graciously given to her. She feels she can achieve this by being the best teacher and mentor that she can be to her students and give of herself to others in need.

Dr. Kim believes that her direct experience as a cultural outsider helps students develop skills to turn potential misunderstandings (through language and behavior) into opportunities to grow. When people speak different languages, the danger of faulty translations is obvious. Given individuals’ tendency to hear what they expect to hear, it is easy for people from different cultures to misunderstand and be misunderstood. For instance, she used to use “idiot” as a term of endearment in Korea, but she has learned that it has an absolutely negative connotation in America. Similarly, her students’ own assumptions are challenged throughout her courses, to their own benefit. Over time, Dr. Kim’s willingness to engage in ways that reveal assumptions and misunderstandings has contributed to her own understanding of her students’ culture and has strengthened the students as individuals.

Dr. Kim has (co)taught or plans to teach the following eight courses at the College of William & Mary:
Undergraduate
EDUC 301: Educational Psychology
BUAD 595: Solving Creative Problems (Mason School of Business)
Graduate
EDUC 582: New Science of Creativity
EDUC 663: Principles of Educational Research
EDUCF 09: Human Growth/Development Life Span
EDUCF 12: Advanced Educational Psychology and Development
EDUCF 65 Research Methods in Education
V 63: Meta-Anlaysis

Dr. Kim has (co)taught the following course at George Mason University:

Undergraduate
BUS 200: Global Environment of Business (Business School)

Dr. Kim has (co)taught the following six courses at Eastern Michigan University:

Undergraduate
EDPS 340: Introduction to Assessment and Evaluation
Graduate
EDPS 504: Nature and Identification of the Gifted
EDPS 614: Psychology of Creativity in Education
EDPS 621: Statistical Application in Educational Research
EDPS 651: Inferential Statistics
EDPS 677: Methods in Quantitative Research

Dr. Kim has (co)taught the following five courses at the University of Georgia:

Graduate
EDPS 504: Nature and Identification of the Gifted
EPSY 7060: Assessment of Gifted Children and Youth
EPSY 7160: Special Problems in Applied Cognition and Development
EPSY 8220: Theory of Creativity
ERSH 6600: Applied Educational Assessment
2. Dr. Kim's Teaching Philosophy
The main elements of Dr. Kim’s teaching philosophy are: 1) inspiring and encouraging students to learn; 2) challenging students with brutally honest feedback to achieve high expectations; and 3) mentoring students anywhere at any time.

1) Inspiring and Encouraging Students to Learn
The author, William Aurthur Ward once stated, “The mediocre teacher tells; the good teacher explains; the superior teacher demonstrates; and the great teacher inspires.” One of Dr. Kim's goals as an educator is to inspire her students. She strongly believes that rigorous research courses are critical for preparing graduate students for the challenge required of graduate courses and developing self-efficacious (truly confident) professionals. Students recognize when a teacher is not enthusiastic about a course and they will have and invest little interest in the class. Instead, she inspires her students with her genuine passion for and excitement about the latest research findings and shares her professional and personal experiences with her research. Her research courses encourage students to engage in thoughtful analyses and critically evaluate published journal articles using high standards. This process helps change her students’ outlooks from consumers of knowledge to producers of knowledge so that they can achieve, at the very least, a thorough understanding of high standards in research. In her research courses, her students create an original literature review and a research proposal based on the review while they cross-pollinate (e.g., collaborate [Cross-Pollination Tips]) with their group members. They develop their research review/proposal throughout the semester, improving their drafts as they learn about the different methods used to study educational trends. Using this experiential learning strategy, each student applies the basic concepts discussed in class to their own research review/proposal, which allows them to acquire the necessary competence to be successful learners and researchers. She believes that teaching is more than presenting information, facts, and ideas, and that an effective teacher must inspire and encourage students’ curiosity while setting and maintaining high expectations. While Dr. Kim guides students through the research process, she encourages them to set goals and helps them develop and identify their own learning style. She also encourages them to develop a love of research and discover their own curiosity, preferences, or interests. She cultivates their capabilities and autonomy for future research so they can become lifelong learners and researchers. The classroom is only the beginning for students, but she is determined to ensure that it sets the foundation for their learning and future success in their field of interest.

In order to encourage students to learn, Dr. Kim believes that developing a positive rapport with her students is crucial. If her students feel that she is approachable and has their best interests at heart, they feel comfortable asking not only more questions, but questions about anything. Furthermore, they are more likely to seek her assistance when they are struggling.

However, she realizes that building and maintaining a positive rapport with students require staying abreast of students’ cultural backgrounds including the many different ways students view, think, and communicate. As a cultural outsider, who grew up in a totally different culture than most of her students, she experiences her own challenges understanding slang, acronyms, differentiating figurative language or phrases that are not taken literally, and the social implications and emotional impact of words and ideas. She learned English out of context; by reading books in Korea and not by conversing with native-English speakers which. Her curious nature and ever expanding vocabulary present many opportunities for students to consider the impact of language and culture on understanding a new concept: i) because she misunderstands the differences of subtle meanings; ii) because what is appropriate or inappropriate in a context is different from how she learned it; iii) because some expressions are appropriate in Korean, but not in English; or iv) because when she is in a hurry it is hard for her to select the correct word quickly or express in indirect ways. To set the right tone for these kinds of verbal exchanges, at the beginning of each semester, she uses a PowerPoint presentation to explain to her students the potential cultural and linguistic differences. She is not intimidated by her errors and mistakes; instead, she openly asks her students for assistance and urges them to call attention to anything she says that might be unclear, mispronounced, inappropriate, wrong, or even offensive. She asks her students to respectfully correct her any time so she can improve her multi-cultural communication skills. She also urges them to bring any other concerns to her attention, including any issues or being unaware of non-verbal communications. She makes light of the situation with her students and laughs about it with them. Most of her students are empathetic and are intrigued by her cultural and linguistic differences. These instances further her warm rapport and creates a friendly, fun atmosphere. She often requires her students to meet and discuss their current and/or research topic either in-person or via Skype. She spends at least 30 minutes and sometimes the conversation naturally develops and turn into multiple hours. She helps guide them in the right direction and to feel more comfortable about approaching her in the future.

2) Challenging Students with Brutally Honest Feedback for High Expectations
Dr. Kim's experiences have made it evident that students must be challenged if they are to discover how to surpass their own expectations. She recognizes the fine line between high and unreasonable expectations. She imposes high expectations on herself and expects the same from her students, and she has seen most students rise to the occasion and surprise themselves with their own capabilities. When students witness Dr. Kim's faith in them, they begin to believe in themselves, and their full potential is realized. She sets the bar higher than what most students expect to achieve and calls on students to challenge themselves and to assume responsibility for their own learning. Setting the bar high, without setting it too high, has been a constant challenge for her as a teacher. She recognizes that some students do not respond well to these expectations and become frustrated, angry, and fatigued. Thus, creating every quiz, every test, selecting the number and level of assignments, and constructing evaluation criteria for the assignments is a professional challenge she is driven to meet with equally high precision and improvement. A self-proclaimed student, she knows improving her teaching methods can only be achieved with time, effort, and the awareness.

Dr Kim’s students’ experience of achieving high standards through their own effort, and truly “earning” their grades is central to her teaching philosophy. She believes that a teacher’s primary responsibility is to enable students to develop their maximum human potential, to explore possibilities, and to seek opportunities for growth and development. To do this, she believes that teachers must maximize the unique value of the academic environment to give brutally honest feedback including compliments, corrections, and critiques.

However, this is an evolving skill. For example, she has learned that accepting brutally honest feedback is much more difficult for American students than Asian students. She has found that the biggest difference between her former students in Korea and her American students is that American students believe in inborn ability while Korean students believe in diligence and hard work. Her research suggests American students believe inborn talents and gifts are greater predictors of success than diligence, and Asian students believe the opposite which is due to their cultural backgrounds that focus on diligence and persistence. Her research findings (and teaching experience) suggest that Americans’ belief in innate abilities short-circuit their hard-work ethic and self-criticism for further improvement. This further impacts how they perceive and apply feedback. This is detrimental because it prevents American students from accepting and applying negative feedback to their tasks. Research has shown that when Asian students receive negative feedback, they work hard to improve themselves according to the feedback they are given. They believe negative feedback helps them identify their shortcomings or deficits, which causes them to not only pay attention to negative feedback but also to take it seriously.

The difference between how American students and Asian students initially accept negative feedback is one example of how Dr Kim strives to understand how people learn, and the best ways to help them. The opportunity her students have to experience and apply brutally negative feedback is often cited as a strength by successful students. Her application of brutally honest (and often negative) feedback has been met with enormous resistance at times, so she openly discusses with her class the rationale behind it, and some student rise to the occasion. Students who welcome her feedback recognize it to be a valuable learning experience and a necessary part of their education. She has found that those students who see her corrections as task-related, rather than personal, and who embrace such challenges become extremely successful in achieving their goals. Her greatest reward comes at the end of every semester when students who were once filled with self-doubt and anxiety express their excitement about achieving a goal they never before dreamed was possible, or when she encounters students who become confident about a subject she taught.

A student, after taking his or her second class with Dr. Kim, wrote:
“KH Kim uses a critical eye when evaluating our work, but provides extensive feedback. She provides guidance to make our work better. The first time I took a class with Dr. Kim (last semester) the amount of feedback was overwhelming and even a little shocking as it wasn't something that I was used to - I had to remember that it wasn't meant as a personal attack, but rather as a means to think outside of the box and improve my research and writing skills. Heeding her advice and comments strengthened my ability to form better research questions and arguments.”

Another student wrote:
“I think just knowing this up front along with gentle reminders that the feedback is for our benefit will help students not to feel personally attacked when they receive a rough draft with 100+ comments attached.”

Another student wrote:
“When you get used to that as a student, and get used to the idea that whether your work is pretty good or a little slapped together it won't make a whole lot of a difference, it's a bit of a shock to get a professor that's so engaged, as Dr. Kim is. I can see how people who have gotten used to coasting might not like having someone suddenly pay attention to their work the way she does, or how someone who's always thought their work is top notch because nobody's taken the time to help them make it better, might think that she's overly critical. I assure you, that's not the case. I've never met a professor more fair minded about grading or more dedicated to helping her students produce really great work and to learn.”

Another student wrote:
“My sense of gratitude for what Dr. Kim has done for my scholarship is genuine and deep, and I believe she is a great asset to the School of Education faculty. I know for a fact that there are students who feel just as I do, and I hope they have made their feelings clear through the evaluation process. I bring this up because I have also heard the occasional grumble from students who don't have the necessary tools for processing Dr. Kim's straightforward feedback, and I know they're writing evaluations too. To them, I say learn to roll with the punches. There isn't really room for ego in quality scholarship.”

Another student wrote:
“When I received the feedback from my lit review in the fall semester it was a tough pill to swallow. Dr. Kim said at the beginning of the course that we have a tendency to think of criticism as fundamentally negative and that's an incorrect assumption. She's absolutely right in this regard . . . Writing for educational research purposes is designed to be direct, concise; to be powerful in the shortest number of words. Dr. Kim's feedback is never personal and students have a hard time understanding that. I was accepted to William and Mary, presumably, because of my success as a graduate student. William and Mary has brilliant students at the S.O.E. They're in my classes and I know them. Hearing constructive feedback on your work is difficult, but, Dr. Kim's extensive revisions are done to make the student a better researcher and a better academic. These criticisms were never personal, never accusatory, and certainly never demeaning. To be a Ph.D. student at a nationally ranked institution such as the College of William and Mary, one needs to be determined, devoted, dedicated, and be willing to face adversities.”

Another student wrote:
“I came to William and Mary as a published, accomplished and well-developed writer (or so I thought). Though English is her second language, Dr. Kim has taught me more about writing and expressing myself as a scholar than any of my teachers since 11th grade Honors English. In my entire life, I have never had a teacher offer such exhaustive, comprehensive, and utterly corrective feedback as Dr. Kim. Though it hasn't always been easy, accepting and incorporating Dr. Kim's critique into my scholarship, it has bolstered my confidence and competence like nothing I have heretofore experienced. My confidence in being able to create unique and useful scholarship has more than doubled as a result of Dr. Kim's instruction. I wish I could attach a copy of the feedback I received on the rough draft of my final project in order to relay the care and attention my efforts were afforded.”

Another student, after taking his or her second class with Dr. Kim, wrote:
“This is the second class I took with Dr. Kim and I feel after this class I really understood her as a person, professor, and researcher. Her research methods class was very intense, but I could tell that she was in her element when it came to teaching creativity. She believes whole heartedly in "the research". She believes in building students' self-efficacy through her feedback. She comes from a very different cultural background than me, but because of this, she brings an alternate perspective, which I really valued. She holds extremely high standards, standards that seem almost unreachable, but after the class I realized I was capable of much more than I ever realized. I think it is hard for some students to truly understand how much she believes in the research; everything she does, every aspect of her life is driven by research."

3) Mentoring Students Anywhere at Any Time Even After the Class
To help students achieve their goals and realize their aspirations, Dr. Kim has mentored her students and helped them in all possible ways. Her objective is to challenge students as much as possible while providing assistance along the way. She believes that all expectations must be complemented with ample student support. She admits that her high expectations can be overwhelming for some students, so she goes out of her way to willingly assist them in any way possible. She makes herself available to students in her office, at her own home, and via Skype. Her openness to help takes time, persistence, and dedication, but she is proud to state it is one of her most notable aspects of teaching. In her course evaluations, she consistently receives comments about her high expectations of others, but in equal measure, her willingness to assist students.

A student wrote:
“I am grateful for having the opportunity to work with Dr. Kim. Who else would rip apart your paper, help you pick up the pieces, and then Skype with you on a Friday from 9:00-10:30 p.m. only for your own benefit?”

Another student wrote:
“She takes a lot of time to become an expert in the work you, as a student, do in her class. Whether that's asking you questions about the posts you've made on blackboard for the week, or sharing new sources with you based on an interest you've expressed, or her extensive feedback on the literature reviews we wrote throughout the semester. I'd wager that if you left your desk right now and went to find Dr. Kim, she'd still be able to tell you what I wrote about, what I did well, and what could be improved. A lot of professors, people who I really admire, pass off a lot of that kind of stuff to TA's or just read final drafts. That's because they're very concerned about publishing, which I get, but it means that taking classes with them kind of feels like you're paying to be in the presence of a genius and just hoping it rubs off on you. I can't imagine Dr. Kim only publishing, she clearly loves being in the classroom, both to share her own knowledge, but also to help you develop yours. I've worked harder (and, I think, better) on my writing and research in her class than I have for a long time. That's because it didn't just feel like I was doing it for myself, but also because I was doing the work for her, like we had a deep and shared interest in the work that could come out of a class like this. It made me care a lot about this topic, and it helped me to become more knowledgeable about it than I am about things I've spent more than one semester studying.”

Since becoming a professor, Dr. Kim has realized that there are vast differences in individual student abilities. Some students exhibit deep knowledge and abilities, while others seem to lack the fundamentals. Also, many students do not give the impression that they will have enough time to master the material being covered. It is especially challenging when students do not know or understand basic mathematical concepts because her research courses includes some statistics.. However, as long as students demonstrates their willingness to learn, she will find a way to reach their needs. In the past, when students have to miss classes due to personal or professional responsibilities, or when students have time-constraining jobs and live in areas close to her home, she will invite them to her home for individualized learning. One time, one of her student’s father passed away at the beginning of the semester and missed classes, she supported him by sending a sympathy card and visiting him at his internship to help him with his final project. Another time, a student experienced difficulty in catching up with the content but lived too far from the campus and Dr. Kim’s home, so she regularly helped with his final project over the phone. Finally, when she had a student who had a one-year-old child, a full-time job, and her husband worked at nights, Dr. Kim visited the student’s home in the evening to assist with her final research proposal.

A student wrote:
“Dr. Kim is an expert in the field and her passion for helping students succeed, her willingness to be available beyond regular hours is highly commendable.”

Another student wrote:
“Dr. Kim was always available to meet one on one and provide feedback.”

Another student wrote:
“Dr. Kim is really great when you need help outside of class.”

Dr. Kim explains the teacher and student relationship is life-long in Asian countries, which she has tried to cultivate in the U.S. between both her students and between her former professors. She treats her students as her extended family and provides special care with economically disadvantaged students who seem to be able to relate to her because of her early backgrounds in Korea. Since becoming a professor, she has tried to develop this relationship with many of her students. It starts with her genuine interests in each student even before a semester begins. Prior to each new semester, she asks her students to submit an assignment titled “Introduce Yourself to Dr. Kim’s Class" (Sample Form) and encourages them to write something unique about themselves with a photo attached. She warns them that she will post their introductions (Sample Class Introduction) on Blackboard so that all students can also get to know one another. In addition, to understand and remember each student better during every semester, she makes quick notes regarding students’ comments, attitudes, and behaviors (both positive and negative) for each class, which also helps her with writing comprehensive recommendation letters in the future.

A student wrote:
“Dr. Kyung-Hee Kim, the professor of my Educational Research class generously offered help academically and in dealing with life difficulties. Being one of the few international faculty members at the school, Dr. Kim is caring and truly open to the idea of diversity. She consoles me and guides me when I had great difficulties. Besides the fact the Dr. Kim is a great professor in helping her students to achieve academically, she is also a true mentor in many other aspects.”

Another student wrote:
“Dr. Kim is passionate and determined to make sure everyone learns the subject and understands, she puts all of her energy into helping students.”

She has worked with, and continues to work with, a variety of students to support their intellectual and professional development. She regularly supervises students’ independent study (Ms. Williams, Ms. Hua, Mr. Wilson, Mr. McGrath, Ms. Staudt, Mr. Vorst, Mr. Hull, and others, and some of the official independent study courses that supervised by Dr. Kim are credited to other faculty members. e.g., Mr. Valdu [Credited to Tieso], Mr. McGrath [credited to Williams], and others). Most of them have been students who have not enrolled in an official independent study course, so they are not credited to Dr. Kim. Additionally, within her research courses, she has included differentiated instructions for students who have scored high on the pre-test (e.g.,Mr. Hall, Ms. Hofbauer, Mr. Pryor, Ms. Scott, and others) by giving them the opportunity to work on independent studies outside of the class. Although it requires extra time and effort, the outcomes of the students’ final products are excellent. She has actively advised students as a thesis committee member or chair (for Ms. Cheng, Mr. Hull, Ms. Tsao) as well as a dissertation committee member (for Ms. T. Smith [2012-2013], Ms. Manglicmot [2012], Ms. M. Smith [2013-present], Mr. Katanski [Computer science: 2013-2014], Ms. Parson [2010-2012], Ms. Kim [2008-2009], Ms. Roege [2011-2013], and others). She has advised many students’ thesis/dissertations without being a member of their committees. She has also guided students (e.g., Ms. Cheng, Ms. Cooley, Ms. Zhao, Mr. Hull, Ms. Holmes, Ms. Eley, Ms. Becker, Mr. Pierce, Ms. Kim, Mr. Chae, Mr. Ma, Ms. Copeland, Ms. Khara, Ms. McGlynn, Ms. Goldman, Mr. Bush, Ms. Zhang, Mr. Rhodes, Mr. McGrath, Ms. Parson, Ms. Staudt, and many others) on selecting and continuing their Ph.D. program, and career choices. She has advised not only her current and former students, but she has also advised many international students on their progress in their program and has helped with revising their thesis, and selecting a Master’s, an Ed.D., or a Ph.D. program. She has helped, has presented, or will present research papers with her former/current students at the AERA, APA, NAGC, VERA, and other conferences. She has also advised and assisted students in the effort to present their thesis or dissertation at a conference or Graduate Research Fairs (Ms. Goff and Mr. Hull) and to publish them in journals. She believes that these experiences have been positive and resulted in a significant advancement for them.

She takes pictures of her students on the last day of each class for each semester, which are presented below, at the end of this teaching section. She shares the pictures with them and treasure the pictures, which she often looks at, in order to remember each of them forever, as she expresses, "once you are my student, you are my mentee forever." Once a student finishes her class, she or he becomes a part of her family. On the last day of each semester (until spring 2014), she cooked Korean traditional dinner for the entire class, for which she prepared for a week, before the end of each semester (Pictures of Korean Food, Marinated Beef on Electric Grill, with Flowers). Even after each semester is over, she invites her former students to her home for meals (e.g., Ms. Ely, Ms. Homes, Ms. Becker, Mr. Pierce, Ms. Wenson, Ms. Josh, Ms. Cheng, Mr. Levigne, Ms. Bauer, Ms. Fowler, Ms. Land, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Rusell, Mr. Ward, Ms. Osman, Ms. Tsao, Mr. Scott, Mr. Hull, and many others). They often invite her and her family to many of their special occasions, including a wedding (Ms. Bauer), birthday celebrations (e.g., Mr. Graham, Ms. Fowler), dinner parties (e.g., Ms. Osman, Ms. Cheng, and others), and others. She has conducted research with many of her former students (Ms. Cheng, Mr. Hull, Ms. Cooley, Mr. Peirce, Mr. Chae, Ms. Kim, and others). She has advised former non-international students on opportunities to teach English in Korea (Mr. Cousins and others). She is not only close to her former students, but she is also close to many international students on campus. She has hosted parties at Thanksgiving and Christmas and invited many of the international students to her home. Together, they share their experiences, including the difficulties and needs as language and cultural minorities, and they create a family-like bond while their families and friends are far away from the U.S. As a faculty adviser for the Korean American Students Association (KASA), she also regularly meets with KASA students to advise them in various aspects of their academic and personal lives. She has also worked closely with both undergraduate and graduate students by advising on their program development, course of studies, and selecting a final project or a thesis advisor. She also served as a faculty adviser for undergraduate students. She was the faculty advisor for the Upperclass Monroe Research Grant awarded to Ms. Yoo for "Educating North Korean Juvenile Refugees: The Case Study of Hangyeore Middle and High School” (Alternative School for North Korean Juvenile Refugees in South Korea). She also served as the faculty advisor for Charles Research Grant for Ms. Jones for "The Effect of Confucianism on the Gender Dynamics of Korean Interpersonal Relationships."

She attends every program/department meeting to better understand the program/department and to be as informed as possible, and to fulfill her responsibilities as an advisor to students. She often asks her colleagues questions related to advising students, and several colleagues have helped her develop best practices for advising students. She attends program advisory board meetings (Meeting Minutes) for faculty and professionals from K-12 education and has intensive discussions to better prepare teachers for the real world. The discussions provide her with information on how to guide and advise her students to become better prepared for the ever-changing teaching profession. She advises many students on their course sequence, teacher certificate testing, program completion timeliness, and other personal issues related to their academic performance. While she advises students, she remains current on the practices and procedures necessary for advising. For example, when she meets with her colleagues and observes how they advise their students, she asks many questions, and they are extremely helpful in improving her instructional and advising effectiveness. Following the W&M Faculty Advisor Expectations, she has created an environment of mutual trust and respect for her advisees by being accessible and responsive to her advisees; by understanding and effectively communicating academic requirements, graduation requirements, and W&M policies and procedures; by encouraging, supporting, and listening to her advisees as they define and develop realistic goals, enhance their decision making skills, and develop and assume responsibility for their educational plan; by helping her advisees learn about and use campus resources to meet their goals; by encouraging and providing information on out-of-classroom learning opportunities, such as research opportunities, internships, study abroad, and service learning; and to maintain confidentiality. She believes that recognizing the skills, education, and experiences that students bring to college is essential, so that their full potential can be realized. She balances a sense of rapport and respect for her students and is pleased that students routinely offer her informal feedback about how comfortable they felt in her classroom, how respected they felt by her, and how challenged they were by expectations (Cards & Letters). Additionally, her formal course evaluations confirm that she is especially strong in being "Available and receptive for consultation outside class.” She believes that these types of experiences help students’ with their emotional and psychological well-being and their academic success.

3. Dr. Kim's Content Expertise
1) Relevant Training/Professional Experiences and Expertise Supported by Current Field-Based Experiences
Dr. Kim is committed to keeping her teaching up-to-date and forward-looking. She continues to immerse herself in the latest knowledge and information related to exceptional teaching; she employs the most currently research-based methods and teaching practices; and provides students with useful, relevant, and current information regarding her research, assessment, statistics, and cognitive psychology courses. This ability stems from i) her work experience at the Georgia Center for Assessment (formerly known as the Center for Testing and Reporting Services) at the University of Georgia; ii) her experience as a statistician for the Georgia Department of Education; and iii) her training in Educational Psychology. She continuously seeks to expand her knowledge base by attending seminars and workshops for statistical methods. In 2008, she attended a National Data Training Seminar sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education: using ELS:2002 and NELS:88 for Research and Policy Discussion (Certificate). In addition, she has attended eight separate workshops at the Center for Statistical Consultation and Research (CSCAR)at the University of Michigan:i) Applications of Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM); ii) Multivariate Techniques: Logistic Regression and Related Techniques (Logistic Regression); iii) Multivariate Techniques: Data Reduction (Data Reduction); iv) Issues in Analysis of Complex Sample Survey Data (Complex Sample Survey); v) Determining Sufficient Sample Size (Sample Size); vi) Applied Survival Analysis, Event History Analysis and Reliability Analysis (Survival Analysis); vii) Regression Analysis (Regression); and viii) Applied Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). She also consistently strives to maintain an in-depth understanding of practical and theoretical issues of traditional research and the most up-to-date developments. As such, she remains current with all professional literature; maintains a high degree of involvement in professional associations; and attends conferences on a regular basis to learn more about the important developments in her field. She believes that her approach helps her remain up-to-date and further enhances W&M’s reputation as a research based institution.

2) Keeping Teaching Up-To-Date by Using the Latest Information including Her Own Latest Research Findings
To enhance her course preparation and improvement, Dr. Kim incorporates the latest journal and news articles and the most recent releases from local and state Departments of Education. For her Research courses (such as EDPS 677, EDUCF 09, EDUCF 65, and EDUC 663), she instructs students on how to search for empirical research articles through the library website (library search step by step). She demonstrates how to locate and use relevant articles from the databases. In addition, she utilizes the Social Sciences Citation Index website to show her students which journals currently have most impact in specific fields. She also introduces current or upcoming training and/or grant opportunities to her students using the AERA, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Institute of Education Sciences (IES), and the U.S. Department of Education websites. These sources are particularly valuable for students in Ph.D. or Ed.D. programs, and some of her students have attended national data training seminarsunder her guidance. She emphasizes and teaches how to follow APA style using the latest version of the APA Publication Manual.

Her current research agenda and scholarly work are important sources of information for her research courses, which focus on the various quantitative research methods. For example, when she teaches causal-comparative research, she uses research studies that explore the relationship between Confucianism and creativity ([Program]). For correlational research, she uses her study that explored the relationship between underachievement and creativity (Kim & VanTassel-Baska, 2010). When she teaches quantitative studies, she uses her meta-analysis studies including analyses of creative and IQ tests (Kim, 2005a) and predictive validity studies of creativity tests and IQ tests (Kim, 2008b). When she teaches intervention research, she uses the Project Clarion study for the CFGE.

She either requires or recommends that students read some of her published articles and utilizes conference presentation materials relevant to her classroom presentations. For example, prior to the start of the semester, she requires her students to read the first three chapters in her recently published book (Introduction, Chapter 1, and Chapter 2), which compare American education to Asian education. Prior to the publication of her book, she required them to read one of her publications (Kim, 2005b). They also aid students in understanding their own educational system while fostering an awareness of trends in international education systems. These readings also help students recognize the emphasis placed on education in Asian cultures, thereby enabling them to better understand her educational philosophy and background (Students' Reflection Samples).

For her Statistics courses (such as EDPS 621and EDPS 651), she utilizes the latest books for teaching SPSS and statistical analyses. She also uses the latest research study examples from the Creativity Research Journal to assist her students in creating their final research report projects. Her students are required to complete a research report using a real data set. She uses the data set from her research report about the relationship between underachievement and creativity (AERA 2007 Data Set). She also uses her data set from a research report about cultural influences on creativity ([AERA 2005 Data Set]) and one from her previous students’ thesis [Cheng Data]. Finally, she uses real data sets from her previous or current studies for the class presentations the mid-term [Sample mid-term], and final test questions.

For her Assessment course (such as EDPS 340), she teaches using research activities related to classroom assessment practices. She teaches the different types of items for traditional test development by utilizing recent elementary, middle, and high school test questions (MEAP, MEAP items), released by a Department of Education. These tests allow her to elaborate and extend the material presented in the textbook. To teach students how to interpret standardized tests, she utilizes reports released by the Department of Education and generates her own data to teach Microsoft Excel and data analysis. This also shows students where they can find valuable teaching resources on the internet. She also utilizes various articles about grade inflation to discuss fair grading (Germain and Scandura (2005). She discusses state-mandated-test items and the benefits and drawbacks of lengthening the test by presenting the students with articles (Link to MEAP Writing Scores Lag: Why Can’t Kids do Better”). She also uses her book chapters (Kim, 2007) and journal articles (Kim, 2006a; Kim, Cramond, & Bandalos, 2006) on issues relating to test reliability and validity. Another journal article on a meta-analysis of IQ and creativity tests (Kim, 2008b) is used to help her students comprehend issues of predictive validity.

For her Cognitive Psychology courses (such as EDUCF 09, EDPS 504, EDPS 614, BUAD 595, EDUC 582, and BUS 200), all the are directly related to her main research interests, so she routinely utilizes her own scholarship in the courses, including journal articles, book chapters, earlier versions of her recently published book, and research presentations from various conferences (PowerPoint presentations). She has developed a new course titled, “The New Science of Creativity,” based on current research and theories in the field of creativity. She believes that this is an important and relevant course for students because creativity is a critical tool for economic and global survival, and there is increased international focus on it. Leaders in all fields (political, business, sciences and the arts) are realizing that creativity is necessary for societal advancement; yet, creativity has been declining in the U.S. and elsewhere. She believes that creativity is especially critical for students in the School of Education because they are current or future educators who must nurture and cultivate creative thinking and intellectual diversity in their students. When studying intelligence in these courses, her students read her book chapter about intelligence (Kim, Cramond, & VanTassel-Baska, 2010). For information relating to gifted children’s needs and development, her students read her book chapter about giftedness (Kim, 2009a) and a journal article about underachievement (Kim, 2008c). After their required reading, students discuss the concepts in class and write a reflection (Sample Students' Reflections). She also utilizes the latest articles from the Creativity Research Journal which are available through the university library. She has requested that the university library subscribe to this journal in both electronic and hard copy (Request to Library for a Subscription). She utilizes articles from this journal to supplement and elaborate on the other instructional materials for her courses. She also utilizes numerous articles from the Journal of Creative Behavior and Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts for the latest research results related to the understanding and development of creative potential.

4. Dr. Kim's Course Planning and Instructional Design
1) Clear Objectives and Expectations
Dr. Kim’s lesson plans are flexible and continually evolving. She tailors her instruction to meet the needs of her class by making all final instructional decisions the morning of class. During these decisions, she ensures the linkage between the course content in her syllabi and daily activities. She modifies her syllabi every semester to meet the changing information and the needs of the students. She includes sufficient flexibility to ensure all the material is covered in an instructionally appropriate manner. She believes communicating clear expectations and goals is essential in assisting students with the learning process. She prepares a detailed syllabus that clearly identifies the expectations of the class and for the students. The syllabus provides a road map for the topics of study. It provides information about the course’s goals and objectives, required readings, and assignments. She communicates this information clearly and early. In addition to the assignment descriptions embedded in the syllabi, she also distributes detailed written assignment descriptions throughout the course. Her syllabi also provide detailed information about other course requirements such as academic honesty, attendance and participation, and professional and ethical behavior.She believes it is important for students to be in class to both learn and help others learn, and thus she emphasizes students’ perfect attendance. She takes attendance by circulating a sign-in sheet (Sample Sign-in Sheet) before class begins. Arriving late and/or leaving early interrupts the flow of the class, and she considers it unprofessional. Students lose half of a point from their final course grades for any absences, arriving tardy, or leaving early. If students enter class after it begins, it is their responsibility to sign in without disturbing the lesson (immediately after class or during a break), otherwise they are marked absent for that class. Some students have considered her attendance policy harsh; however, she considers class attendance and participation critical for both themselves and their fellow classmates. She assesses participation based on class preparation, active engagement, timeliness, and professionalism. She believes that professionalism is especially important for the students in the School of Education because they are current or future role-models of their own students.

Before the first class meeting, she e-mails her students directions for accessing the course’s BlackBoard site, and she emails them the syllabus. Prior to the first class, she requires her students to study the syllabus content in-depth. During the first week of class, she asks specific questions about the precise content of the syllabus so students have a clear understanding of the course objectives and requirements and how they will be evaluated. She requires each student to demonstrate a clear understanding of the syllabus and its requirements by giving a short quiz. She also orally reviews the syllabus in great detail and invites students to ask as many questions as possible about the course objectives, goals, and expectations. At the beginning of the semester, she often invites former students to speak and advise future students what it takes to be successful in her classes (Request for Being a Guest Speaker and Permission). They typically talk about what they have learned and how were successful in her class. They also convey important tips and strategies for earning good grades. Some of her guest speakers have created a PowerPoint presentation (Guest Speaker, Mr. Martin; Guest Speaker, Mr. Earnster), and others have produced a hand-out (Guest Speaker, Mr. Sander) outlining their advice. Many students report that using guest speakers is very useful and helpful for them, especially for tips on how to complete their projects. In addition to providing students with evaluation rubrics, she also displays examples of her former students’ projects, literature review papers (Sample Literature Review), and research proposals (Sample Research Proposal). This provides students with a point of reference for their final products and how they will be assessed. These examples also model the developmental nature of learning by employing low risk activities and examples of high quality student work. She provides examples on the Blackboard web site after she gets a written permission [Permission To Use] from the students for her to use their work as examples and instructional activities (Sample Reliability & Validity Activity) (Sample CAP1& 2 Activity). She provides all the examples and expectations before students create their own projects, so that they have a complete understanding of all aspects of the assignment. To support student learning throughout the semester, all materials are made available on Blackboard. Additionally, she begins each class meeting with a review of the previous class and an overview of objectives and goals for the current class.

She makes use of appropriate technology to enhance instruction inside and outside the classroom. She maintains a BlackBoard site for web-based support to answer students’ questions, post announcements, assignments, extra readings, examples of previous students’ work, and study guides. She also uses it to administer her weekly quizzes, midterm and final exams; and for students to submit assignments. She uses relevant internet sites to expand the content of the course, including sites for performing statistical analyses and the American Psychological Association's (APA) formal website for citation help. Finally, she regularly facilitates her lectures with PowerPoint presentations, which are posted on Blackboard so that students can print out the slides or follow along during class. Additionally, the instructional materials she utilizes consistently include a wide variety of supplemental handouts, sharing of relevant books and journal articles, uses of multimedia technology (e.g., smart classrooms, relevant videotapes, music, websites), and appropriate uses of materials produced by school districts. She also utilizes her children’s school materials and reports (Elementary School State-Mandated Test Results and High School State-Mandated Test Results), standardized test results (IOWA reports), and school district reports.

She conscientiously prepares for every class meeting. In preparation, she reviews the assigned readings, prepares detailed PowerPoint slides, collects relevant books and materials for reference during class, and carefully organizes handouts. Her students routinely comment on her organization, which is both a compliment and validation for her hard work. In preparing, she seeks to communicate to students that she cares deeply about the teaching process and models a professional level of preparation. She keeps detailed files for each class session that contain copies of PPT slides, handouts distributed, lecture notes, and other items circulated during class. Before each class session, she places the following information on her PPT slides: i) review of previous week’s content and quiz questions; ii) readings to be completed prior to class (assigned readings and access to course Blackboard site); iii) assignments and quizzes due; and iv) access to supplemental resources (additional materials and relevant links) (EDPS 340 Weekly PowerPoint Slides). She considers her organizational skills to be one of her greatest strengths as an instructor. She also strives to maximize her effectiveness by providing classroom presentations that are clear and understandable. To this end, she asks her graduate assistant to review them for clarity several days before each classroom presentation, and she also arrives to class early, fully prepared. Each lecture begins with a review of the previous lecture and an overview of the current class session. It is her belief that these presentations and handouts reflect clarity in her thinking, a thoughtful approach to organizing classes, and the depth and breadth of coverage necessary to deliver an effective lecture.

2) Instructional Techniques and Student Assignments Aligned with Objectives and Content/Skills
Dr. Kim launches student learning by beginning with simple assignments and eventually including more comprehensive ones. She develops her courses by starting with relevant background material to contextualize and reinforce the course content. Thus, she provides an explanation of “why” before she provides the details of “how” to demonstrate and reinforce the relevance of the material. Throughout the semester, she first incorporates developmentally appropriate, low-stakes assessment and then uses higher-stakes assessment after instruction and implementation.

For her Assessment course, she begins the course with the following important concepts of the assessment and teaching: i) clearly connect assessments and student learning; ii) use objectives to create high-quality class room assessments; iii) align objectives and assessment methods; and iv) create unbiased assessments. Then she instructs students how to construct good traditional or alternative assessments. In addition, she provides relevant materials (specific directions [Sample CAP Directions], deadlines, and scoring rubrics and checklists [Sample SLA Directions] for the major projects. She gives students a list of objectives for the mid-term exam (Test 1) and final exam (Test 2), which are used as study guides. Students are expected to create a blueprint for their classroom assessment plan (CAP) at the beginning of the semester to serve as a guide for their curriculum unit development. They initially submit a draft of their blueprint (Samples of CAP1 Draft Feedback) for homework. The drafts are neither graded nor is a rubric applied to. Draft submission is only worth one out of a possible 100 points for the semester. The intent is for students to put their ideas down on paper, struggle with creating objectives, and take risks by exposing their knowledge and skills; thereby enabling her to meet their individual needs through feedback and counseling. After creating a traditional assessment, they develop an authentic (real-life related) assessment and their curriculum unit and blueprints are resubmitted and graded.

For her Research courses, she provides weekly quiz questions (PPT), which are answered in essay format and include information related to the essential concepts to give students a big picture of the semester. She provides three to four questions per chapter, or approximately eight potential quiz questions per week. She also provides detailed directions for their final research proposal (Directions for Literature Review and Research Proposal) so that students are aware of the concepts they need to master prior to completing their final research proposal. The students are required to meet with her (Meetings for a Research Topic) to decide their topic for their literature review. They are initially required to submit a draft (for 5 points [Rubric for Grading Draft]), and she gives feedback (Sample Feedback on Literature Review Drafts). Then the students revise their paper accordingly and submit one more time for a final grade (for 20 points). Further, for their research proposal, her students are also initially required to submit a draft (for 5 points), and she gives feedback (Sample Feedback on Research Proposals). And then, they revise their proposal accordingly and submit their final proposal (for 25 points).

For her Statistics courses, she begins the course with an overview of quantitative research methodology, the meaning of data, and the process of conducting and reporting quantitative research. Then she moves on to the statistics content of the course. She uses a similar strategy for this course as she does with her research courses including weekly homework assignments. During her early semesters of teaching statistics courses, she graded each homework assignment thoroughly so that students could learn from their mistakes. However, she realized that she was needlessly increasing their anxiety about the class – particularly among students who were struggling with math anxiety. As a result, she has changed the system for grading homework and started using ungraded homework assignments as a preview to the next class lecture, which was graded for completion.

For her Cognitive Psychology courses, to assist her students in accomplishing the course objectives, she requires her students to keep a journal and submit a reflection every week corresponding to the readings (Sample Chapter Reading Reflections) or discussions on BlackBoard (Sample Discussions on BlackBoard). Students are expected to determine how each of the readings answer (or fail to answer) the five questions in the course objectives (in the EDPS 614 Syllabus and EDUC 582)for that week. They can include their relevant experiences, thoughts, and readings outside of class, but they are not summarizing the readings; they are expected to ask questions, argue, agree, synthesize, and exemplify. Keeping a journal (EDPS 614 Reflection Samples) for the course allows students to interact with the course content in a low-risk manner. Additionally, in the beginning of the semester, her students are required to meet with her to decide a topic of their interest. They are initially required to submit a draft of their literature review paper, and even though the drafts are only worth five points, she gives substantial feedback (Sample Feedback on Drafts). Every semester she creates a hand-out focusing on that class’ common mistakes (Common mistakes for EDUCF 09 Literature Review) and reviews them as a class to help her students’ understand the expectations, so that they can revise their submissions and submit a perfect final review paper (for 20 points).

Dr. Kim believes in helping students develop their self-directional skills. Consistent with the literature on adult learning theory, she strives to balance her own delivery of information with students’ experiences and the expertise that they bring to the classroom. As a result, she engages in didactic instruction emphasizing her own sharing of information. She also employs active large and small group discussions on relevant concepts, research study presentations by students, research study discussions, and guest speakers from previous classes. She requires students to be prepared through reading assignments and supplementary worksheets before they attend class so that they can actively participate.

For her Assessment course, students receive the syllabus prior to attending the first class and assigned a reading assignment (EDPS 340 Syllabus). In addition, students can move ahead of the course schedule by reviewing the detailed project descriptions and examples from her previous students on the course Blackboard. Some students complete their CAP or students learning analysis (SLA) projects before receiving any instruction and then modify their projects based on instruction in class or in person. Before teaching any specific type of test question, the students must complete the CAP 2 project. This project requires students (3% of their final grades) to develop each type of traditional test question (6 multiple choice questions, 1 interpretation exercise with at least 3 questions, 5 binary choice questions, 1 matching question with 4-8 parts, 5 fill-in-the-blank questions, 1 short answer question, and 1 essay question [CAP2 Example]). Therefore, when she teachers the guidelines for developing each type of question (for general guidelines [ General Guidelines for Developing Items], for multiple choice questions [Guidelines for Multiple Choice Questions], for interpretation exercise [Guidelines for Interpretive Items], for binary choice questions [Guidelines for Binary Questions], for matching questions [Guidelines for Matching Questions], for fill-in-the-blank questions [Guidelines for Fill-in-the Blank Questions], for short answer questions [Guidelines for Short Answer Questions], and for essay questions [Guidelines for Essay Questions]), they can ask any questions, and modify and revise their own already-made test questions based her instructions.

For her Research courses, the syllabus includes weekly essay exam questions so that students can study before each class. This enables them to monitor, and if necessary, adjust their understanding of the content during class. She also encourages students to start their final research proposal early in the semester and ask for frequent feedback on their progress. This allows them to gain a better understanding of the curriculum and submit a high quality work.

For her Statistics courses, students are expected to complete homework (EDPS 621 Weekly Assignments) on concepts they have not yet been taught. They are required (10% of the final grade) to read the textbook and answer questions that expose them to the new concepts and materials. This encourages them to participate by asking questions about the material that they do not understand before they come to class. This method is especially useful for learning SPSS, because she believes that the best way to learn SPSS is to explore or play with it rather than use a boring lecture to teach which button to click on a computer menu.

For her Cognitive Psychology courses, students are expected to keep a journal. For example, for their creativity journal, they try to determine how each of the readings answers the five questions in the course objectives: i) who is creative? ii) what is creativity? iii) is the creative process the same for all individuals and across domains? iv) must creativity result in a product? v) In what ways does the environment affect creativity? In this process, are self-teaching by addressing the things that agree or disagree with their point of view and the questions that they have. One of the main purposes of the journal is to encourage student to interact with the content in a self-directed manner.

Dr. Kim believes in establishing effective and timely communication with students. For all of her courses, she requires her students to meet with her at least twice each semester to discuss their progress in her class. Providing individualized and specific feedback to students is essential to their learning and advancement. She grades students’ exams or papers and always returns them with effective and timely feedback. She also teaches her students that teachers should take no more than one week to grade papers and exams. This allows enough time to grade thoroughly, it but still ensures that students receive timely and effective feedback. Even when she attends conferences to present research studies, she grades materials in transit. She provides her students with extremely specific feedback with the track change function on Microsoft Word so that they can examine her specific comments. She gives as much feedback as she can – more than most students are accustomed to. Therefore, at the beginning of each semester, she makes sure that students understand her commentary style to ensure they do not view her comments as negative.

Dr. Kim believes in creating a classroom that encourages learning – not just listening and absorbing. She works hard to devise ways to actively engage students in the learning process. Because she relies on using lectures with PowerPoint slides, she focuses on additional ways in which to involve students. At times, this involves creating an anticipatory set of slides to heighten student attention and motivation for learning. At other times, it involves using an experiential activity to anchor learning that has occurred during lectures. She creates activities in which students are encouraged to apply skills that have recently been discussed. She believes that students and professors are partners in the learning process. Accordingly, she actively encourages students to take charge of their own learning; by asking questions, incorporating their own preferred learning style, or making suggestions. She uses cooperative learning in her assessment and research courses. These courses require students to have an understanding of reliability and validity. These courses require students to have an understanding of reliability and validity. She provides students with tape measures to measure their classmates’ head sizes to truly understand what reliability and validity mean and how they can apply these concepts in the future (Sample Reliability & Validity Activity). To assist students in functioning well as teams, she invests time in teaching teamwork approaches using several simulation activities (Sample CAP1& 2 Activity) .

5. Dr. Kim's Assessment and Evaluation Practices
1) Rigorous Assessments of Course Objectives
Dr. Kim believes in communicating with students regularly about their achievement.All of her graduate courses require weekly assignments or exams (weekly reflection assignments based on their reading; completion of weekly worksheets; or weekly exam questions. These weekly assignments and exams keep her informed on each students’ degree of attainment. Further, she strives to keep her students updated regarding their progress by e-mailing them or by meeting with them. This gives her the opportunity to identify and correct students who are not on target.

For her undergraduate courses, almost every other class (approximately once a week), students are expected to submit an assignment. Once they receive feedback and grades for CAP 3, SLA, and the Mid-term exam, they are required to have two meetings with her about their progress. The meetings are to identify areas where, if necessary, students need to invest more effort to make improvements on the remaining assignments and for the final exam.

Dr. Kim believes that her courses serve important functions in developing professionalism in both undergraduate and graduate students. Her Assessment Course served multiple functions in the preparation of future teachers including developing familiarity with state standards and benchmarks, creating traditional and authentic assessments, and evaluating student learning. Each of these skills are critical for a student teaching portfolio and are key to becoming an effective and mindful classroom teacher. In addition, the close relationship between the projects in EDPS 340 and CURR 304/305 emphasized the important relationship between assessment and instruction and the essential role it plays in quality instruction. The final Classroom Assessment Plan (CAP) project (Sample CAP1, CAP2, CAP3, & CAP4) and Student Learning Analysis (SLA) project (Sample SLA) were authentic learning experiences that undergraduate students would employ as future teachers.

Two of her research courses, EDPS 677 and EDUCF 65, emphasize consuming research rather than producing it, and EDUC 663 emphasizes producing research. However, she believes that students need to create their own research proposal (Sample Research Proposal) to become both better consumers and better producers of research. Her students are encouraged to apply the principles and underlying concepts of educational research from these courses to their own areas of interest as education professionals. she believes that students learn best by doing and by discovering what works best (or should be avoided) on their own. If they only learn by being told one way of accomplishing a task, they will most probably forget the subject in the future.

Her Statistics courses were designed for educational professionals as an introduction to behavioral science statistics. However, she focused more on the application of statistical procedures applied to research rather than the conceptual aspects of behavioral science and statistics. After students completed their final data analysis projects (Data Analysis Project Directions), they were expected to be able to apply the knowledge and skills in their own research using SPSS software. Simultaneously, students were able to understand published scientific research studies and critically evaluate them. The final data analysis project and two tests used real data sets (that were either provided for them or created by them through interests external to the class, either academic or professional) which made the learning authentic. Fundamentally, she wanted to encourage the development of educators who are committed to their own ongoing professional growth and are aware of research relating to issues in our culturally diverse society.

She designed the Cognitive Psychology courses to explore historical and contemporary theories regarding the nature, development, and measurement of creativity or giftedness. For example, the students focused on examining the creative person, process, product, and environment through the eyes of creative individuals and through some of the most eminent theorists, philosophers, and researchers in related fields for EDPS 614 and EDUC 582. Their final projects (Sample Final Presentations for EDPS 614 and Sample Final Presentations for EDUC 582 [Ms. Williams], [Ms. Hua], [Ms Hao], [Ms. Norton], [Mr. Martin], [Mr. Wilson], [Mr. Siradakis], and [Mr. Riccio]) could have been used for educating other educators and parents or submitted for potential publication in the field of creativity. Most of the students for this course were already educators. Thus, one of my goals was to teach them to identify creative students and to further develop and enhance these students' creative potential. Students are also encouraged to reflect on their own creative potential, including both their strengths and weaknesses, so that they may fulfill their own creative possibilities.

“This course had a lot of material to cover in a very short time so it was challenging. I can see how students who did not have any background in research would have been extremely overwhelmed with the amount of work and content in this course. However, Dr. Kim made her expectations of the class form the first day and we knew we would have to work very hard. She made herself available to anyone who required extra help and was more than generous with her feedback on our assignments to ensure we really understood the material and to help us write a research proposal as correctly as possible. I thought it was good to do educational research to learn how to find research articles in the field of education so I can use those resources to when I become a teacher. I think Dr. Kim’s primary goal for us was to teach us to be critical thinkers when it comes to the world of research and not believe every article we read, but most importantly to use the information we learn from important studies and put it into practice when we become teachers. I think she achieved this goal very well and I enjoyed the material we learned in class. Thanks for working so hard for us, Dr. Kim. We appreciated it very much. I will try to do the same for my students.”

Dr. Kim believes in evaluating students on attaining appropriate course objectives. She wants students to leave her classes with skill sets that nurture good assessors, practitioners, educators, and researchers -- not just good test takers. Her grading scales reflect her belief in the developmental nature of learning, with homework and class participation being worth as much as mid-term and final exams. Projects that require applying the knowledge and skills imparted in class are more important than memorizing information and as such, are worth the majority of points in her classes. Her expectations for projects are made clear with examples, specific directions, continual feedback, conversations in and out of class, e-mail, and Skype. Her exam questions and projects require students to go beyond recall and require the application and analysis of key constructs covered in the class. This level of understanding is important to develop educators who will be exposed to a wide variety of material and assessments as they refine their work in their future careers. This level of understanding is even more important for students in her other courses who range from individuals with limited college math experience to central district administrators who are responsible for analyzing and interpreting standard test data. She firmly believes that multiple forms of assessment, including homework, weekly exams, projects, and exams, provide vantage points for her evaluation of student learning and multiple ways for students to demonstrate their mastery of course objectives.

Dr. Kim believes in the use of fair evaluation procedures when evaluating students. Assessing students’ learning in a fair and reasonable manner requires her to maintain an unbiased and consistent assessment approach and that her methods of assessment are align to the course objectives. One method she uses to ensure fairness is the use of blind-grading. Although she would expect herself to be unbiased when grading papers and exams even without students’ names, she thinks that using a number system further removes the potential for bias. While some papers and exams have students’ names on them, for more important general assignments, she asks students use a number which she assigns to each student at the beginning of the semester. Thereafter, she assigns grades to a student's number and does not correlate these numbers to students’ names until final grades are calculated. She also ensures fairness by grading papers in numerical order first, and then grades them again in descending order. This helps ensure randomness and the equal grading of papers that are unaffected by other students' achievements. Finally, she posts rubrics for each assignment early in the semester so that her students know even before they start working on each assignment what she expects from their work (Literature Review Rubric, & Research Proposal Rubric). Then, she evaluates their work according to the rubrics and provides them feedback on the graded rubric. She strives to give an early indication of her expectations, but formal and informal students’ evaluations at times opines that she is a “harsh grader.” However, she expects her students to approach their studies with the intensity and commitment that she exemplifies. Given this and her concomitant desire to see students succeed, she strives to be very clear about her goals, objectives, and expectations. She gives as much brutally honest feedback as she can in the hope that students will understand her expectations, and that they will be able to determine how to succeed in her classes. Her formal course evaluations confirm that she is strong in "Fair and impartial in feedback, comments, and grading," which her students rates her highly in.

2) Students’ Learning and Outcomes
Dr. Kim believes that her teaching practices confirm her beliefs through the quality of her students’ work as well as their formal and informal evaluations of her teaching. She has actively encouraged and helped students work toward publishing their classroom assignments from her research courses. The quality of her students work has been demonstrated by accepted proposals from conferences for AERA 2010 (Mr. Hull a, Mr. Hull b), 2009 (Mr. Hull a, Mr. Hull b); (2009), APA 2010 (Ms. Cheng); 2007 (Ms. Cheng); 2009 (Ms. Henry, Ms. Lorio, Ms. Webster), NAGC 2016 (Mr. Martin, Ms. Williams, and Mr. Siradakis); 2010 (Mr. Hull, Mr. Lawrence a, Mr. Lawrence b, Mr. Lawrence c); 2008 (Mr. Hull); VERA 2016 (Mr. Wilson); APA 2017, (Ms. Choi, Ms. Paek, Ms. Hao, Ms. Williams, Mr. Martin, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Pierce); Graduate Research Fair (Mr. Hull and Ms. Goff); and others. The quality of her works with students have also been demonstrated by her publications with her students (Sample Publication; Mr. Hull (2015a); Mr. Hull (2015 b); Mr. Hull (2012); Mr. Hull (2010); Mr. Hull (2009); Ms. Roege (2013); Ms. Coiner (2011); Mr. Chae (2011), Ms. Andersen (2011); Mr. Laurence (2011); Ms. Deighton (2011); Ms. Cheng (2010); Mr. Pierce (in press a); Mr. Pierce (in press b); Mr. Pierce (2014 a); Mr. Pierce (2014 b); Mr. Pierce (2014 c); Mr. Pierce (2014 d); Mr. Pierce (2013 a); Mr. Pierce (2013 b); Mr. Pierce (2013 c); Mr. Pierce (2013 d); Mr. Pierce (2013 e); Mr. Pierce (2013 f); Mr. Pierce (2013 g); Mr. Pierce (2013 h); Mr. Coxen (2016); Mr. Coxen (2013); Ms. Kim (2014 a); Ms. Kim (2014 b); Ms. Kim (2014 c); Ms. Kim (2014 d); Ms. Williams (in press a); Ms. Williams (in press b); Ms. Williams (in press c); Ms. Williams (in press d); Ms. Williams (in press e); Mr. Martin (in press a); Mr. Martin (in press b); Mr. Martin (in press c); ,Mr. Martin (in press d); Mr. Martin (in press e); Ms. Hua (in press a); Ms. Hua (in press b); Ms. Hao (in press a); Ms. Hao (in press b); Mr. Wilson (in press), Mr. Siradakis (in press), and Ms. Norton (in press a); Ms. Norton (in press b). She has helped her students write and submit research proposals for applying for research grants. She has also helped her students select appropriate journals, write cover letters (Sample Cover Letter), and submit their paper to journal editors (Sample Manuscript).

She has helped her students choose their research topic by meeting with them and asking them their curiosities, preferences, and interests. In addition, she helps them find appropriate primary and secondary sources because they are required to use at least 25 peer-reviewed journal articles, and 15 of them must be primary sources. As she gives each lecture on writing a review or a research proposal, she uses each students’ actual draft to help him or her with each section of the paper. She understands that most of her students do not have specific ideas for their thesis/dissertation topics yet. However, writing a review or research proposal that might become part of their future thesis/dissertation can encourage them to start thinking about their topics early. This can help them with: i) thinking ahead about their research interests for their future thesis/dissertations; ii) developing their proposals further for grants to help themselves financially; and iii) selecting future courses related to their research interests in their master’s/doctoral programs. For example, if they can identify the kinds of research methods that they could use for data analyses for their thesis/dissertation early, they can take specific courses from inside or outside SoE to gain the knowledge needed.

6. Dr. Kim’s Instructional Delivery Quality
1) Students’ Course Ratings for Instructional Delivery Quality
Many students do not choose to take Research course and take her class solely to meet the program requirements. Students perceive research courses to be mundane and challenging, yet Dr. Kim’s have received consistently high evaluations with few exceptions. For example, for one semester, there were multiple student complaints regarding the time of the doctoral research course because it was offered at 7:15 PM, the last class of the night. The administration insisted on offering her doctoral research course during the latest time slot, and this decision was made without her input. Thirteen out of twenty-three students specifically complained about scheduling of the class on their course evaluations. Their comments included:
“Please make this class a 4:30 class again. It was very hard to maintain focus for such an intense and important class at 9:45 at night. Luckily, Dr. Kim pushed us to stay awake and encouraged us throughout the semester.”
“The 7:15 time of this class was an impairment for learning. We all had a hard time concentrating on this subject at this time of night. Also, I feel as though I was fatigued throughout the whole of the final exam and did not do great in result.”
“It was VERY VERY LATE IN THE DAY. This kind of factual, rote memorization of details material (as opposed to human interest subject matter) was very hard to attend to at this time of day.”
“A research class should not start at 7:15 pm!!!!”
“the 7:15pm time slot is too late for a research class.”
“The course was too late in the evening for a course of this type.”
“7:00 pm time slot is TOO late for this type of class.”
“The only weakness is that it is at 7:15 pm.”
“The lateness of this class is TERRIBLE! Research classes should NOT be held at 7:15”
“This class was large (24 people) and late (7:15-9:45). Since this course requires a lot of concentration and class discussion, it would be easier if it was at 4:30.”
“EDUC 663 should not be taught in a 7:15 - 9:45 session.”
“Weaknesses: Move the class to an earlier time period.”
“Weaknesses: Move the time forward to 4:30. I was tired at the end of the day and needed full attention for this course.”

In the fall of 2015 and the spring of 2016, Dr. Kim dramatically changed the content of her research courses. These courses cover an exceptional amount difficult material which is time consuming for both her and the students. Based on Megan Tschannen-Moran’s request at the May 2015 end-of-the-year EPPL retreat she added to her course content, “The faculty would be pleased for the students to gain at least a beginning understanding of how to develop research questions and to use some basic statistics to answer them before they move on to intermediate statistics.” Dr. Kim was willing to try and add this new component knowing it could be either a huge success or failure. She made this major change knowing the dean fully supported the faculty members’ and trusted such changes for potential improvement. Obviously the additional requirements necessitated even more work, but she felt that many students were not ready for the intellectual and logical thinking required to construct a quality quantitative research study. In order to support their learning better, she spent a tremendous amount of additional time to support the students’ learning of higher-level research methods. The added components included students’ posting on discussion boards via Blackboard (at least three questions and two comments), at least one more Skype conference with her, a separate research proposal (including discussions of sampling methods, internal and external validity, research design, analysis methods, results, etc.) During Skype meetings, she had them ask questions and checked their progress in the course and final assignment.

As a result, she found that their final literature review and research proposal papers were much better quality than the ones from her previous courses. This was significant especially because the students had a lower average readiness than previous students. She spent much more time helping students in the fall of 2015 and in the spring of 2016 than any other semesters, and even after the conclusion of the semester, she continuously helps them conduct actual research from the course such as research design and getting IRB approval. She also helped them refine their final products from the course and submit them to appropriate journals.
She believes her teaching methods are worthwhile because several of her students have submitted for publication or published their final class projects (Ms. Williams [in press a]; Ms. Williams [in press b]; Ms. Williams [in press c]; Ms. Williams [in press d]; Ms. Williams [in press e]; Mr. Martin [in press a]; Mr. Martin [in press b]; Mr. Martin [in press c]; ,Mr. Martin [in press d]; Mr. Martin [in press e]; Ms. Hua [in press a]; Ms. Hua [in press b]; Ms. Hao [in press a]; Ms. Hao [in press b]; Mr. Wilson [in press], Mr. Siradakis [in press], and Ms. Norton [in press a]; Ms. Norton [in press b]), and some of them have presented or will present their class projects at the 2016 National Association for Gifted Children conference (Mr. Martin, Ms. Williams, and Mr. Siradakis) and at the 2016 Virginia Educational Research Association conference (Mr. Wilson). This gives them practical experience in educational research. She wants to maintain the expectation and reputation of the class as an exceptional educational experience.

However, during the fall of 2015 and the spring of 2016, many students did not appreciate the extra-heavy workload, especially after getting brutally honest feedback on their projects. Since then, she has attempted to soften the workload required for her Research courses. To ensure the students become evidence-based practitioners; however, she urges that the administration and faculty members educate the students of the importance of research in educational or counseling practices. Another concern of hers is that students’ readiness for her research courses (based on the pre-test scores) are getting lower each semester. She respectfully requests that the administration and faculty members should not accept those extremely unqualified students.

The race and ethnicity of professors affect students’ perceptions of professors’ teaching competence (Lee & Janda, 2006). When there is divergence between students’ and professors’ cultural backgrounds, students’ ratings of professors’ teaching effectiveness decline (Amin, 2000). Students often rate ethnic minority professors as less effective than Caucasian professors (Anderson & Smith, 2005; DiPietro & Faye, 2005; Hamermesh & Parker, 2005; Smith, 2007; Smith & Anderson, 2005). Further, when students consider their assigned work and course subjects are difficult yet mandatory (such as Dr. Kim’s mandatory research/statistics courses), their ratings of professors’ teaching effectiveness decline (Burdsal & Bardo, 1986; Jackson et al., 1999; Marsh, 1982; Mason, Steagall, & Fabritius, 1995). Moreover, women minority professors, especially when they display strict, none-lenient teaching styles (such as Dr. Kim’s teaching style), students’ ratings also decline (Anderson & Smith, 2005; Smith & Anderson, 2005). Further, students negatively evaluate nonnative-English-speaking (especially Asian) professors in teaching evaluations, with particularly lower ratings in clarity and helpfulness (Subtirelu, 2015; e.g., Gilroy, 2007; Lee & Janda, 2006). Even when their evaluations on Asian professors are positive, they comment on the professors’ ability to overcompensate for communication difficulties (Subtirelu, 2015). Students often display biased opinions of foreign professors even before interacting with them, which leads them to avoid registering for courses with professors who have foreign-looking names (Jacobs & Friedman, 1988), especially Asian-looking names (Subtirelu, 2015) listed in the course schedule. Further, their focus on professors’ language often predispose them to experience these professors as problematic communicators (e.g. Edwards, Shaver, & Oaks, 2009). The conflict and tension between minority/foreign professors and their students are more common in the academic fields where professors are predominantly Caucasian with little diversity. In those fields in which members are culturally and ethnically diverse, minority/foreign professors are often considered effective (Neves & Sanyal, 1991). For example, in science and engineering, nonnative-English-speaking professors, including Asian professors, are well-represented and are well-accepted by other faculty and their students (Connors, 1987; Harrington, Southerland, & Johnson, 1993). But in the social sciences, especially education, minority/foreign professors are especially under-represented increasing the conflict and tension between the professors and their students (Galbraith, 2002; Lee & Janda, 2006). This is magnified at older universities where students often lack respect for minority/foreign professors and criticize and/or rate them low in their course evaluations (Galbraith, 2002). Yet, when minority/foreign professors teach subject matters that are directly related to their ethnicity, like Asian professors’ teaching Asian Studies courses, students rate these professors high in teaching evaluations.

Considering all of the research findings against students’ course evaluations of minority/foreign professors and nonnative-English-speaking Asian professors, especially in the social science and education fields, students’ course evaluations of Dr. Kim are exceptional. As Table 1 shows, she has consistently earned high student evaluations despite the fact that her Research courses are perceived by majority of her students to be the hardest course in SoE.

Table 1. Students' Evaluations of Dr. Kim's Courses by Each Criterion
Semester
\Criterion

Course\
Knowledge of the subject matter of the course
Early identification of course objectives and requirements
Organization of content and learning experiences in the course
Presentation and explanation of course content
Identification of criteria for evaluating your performance.
Encourage participation in class discussions and activities
Open to diverse opinions and questions
Available and receptive for consultation outside class
Intellectually challenging and encourages thinking for yourself
Helpful in meeting course objectives and requirements
Knowledge of the subject matter of the course
09 Spring
F65
4.56
5
4.69
4.56
4.88
4.38
4.63
4.94
4.56
4.88
4.88
F09
4.55
5
4.45
4
5
5
4.82
5
4.73
4.64
4.82
09 Fall
F65
4.88
5
5
4.88
5
5
4.75
5
4.88
5
5
663
4.62
4.85
4.5
4.69
4.85
4.77
4.54
4.77
4.77
4.69
4.67
10 Spring
F65
4.81
4.75
4.44
4.25
4.69
4.81
4.63
4.88
4.94
4.88
4.75
F09
4.19
4.69
3.56
3.81
4.56
4.75
4.75
4.88
4.38
4.25
4.13
663
4.9
5
4.82
4.82
5
5
5
5
5
5
4.91
10 Fall
F65
4.64
5
4.36
4.55
4.55
4.55
4.73
3.6
4.18
4.36
4.64
663
4.59
4.66
4.1
4.17
4.41
4.34
4.52
3.75
4.17
4.07
4.55
11 Spring
F65

4.88
4.94
4.88
4.76
4.88
5
4.65
4.94
4.88
4.94
4.88
663

4.33
4.67
4.58
4.58
4.83
4.75
4.5
4.83
5
4.92
4.92
12 Spring
301

4.27
4.92
4.64
4.48
4.96
4.92
4.96
4.85
4.73
4.88
4.92
F12

4
4.4
3.6
3.4
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.63
3.2
3.9
4.5
12 Fall
F65

4.95
4.7
4
3.75
4.3
4.6
4.4
4.85
4.5
4.32
4.55
663

5
4.91
4.43
4.52
4.65
4.96
4.91
4.87
4.87
4.96
4.83
13 Spring
F65

4.95
4.65
4.3
4.35
4.7
4.7
4.85
4.7
4.63
4.8
4.84
663

5
5
3.86
4.43
4.43
4.86
5
4.86
5
4.86
4.57
13 Fall
V63

5
4.8
4.8
4.6
4.6
5
5
5
5
5
5
663

4.47
4.12
3.76
3.47
4.12
4.24
4.24
4.29
3.94
4.06
4.18
14 Spring
F65-1

4.95
4.52
3.78
3.83
4.26
4.61
4.52
4.65
4.7
4.3
4.52
F65-2

4.85
4.54
4.23
3.69
4.31
4.69
4.92
4.38
4.62
4.62
4.77
15 Fall
F65

5
3.4
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.6
4.2
4.6
4.6
4
4
663

4.93
3.93
3.33
3.73
3.87
4.47
4.6
4.27
4.47
4.33
3.73
16 Spring
582

5
4.13
4.75
4.75
4.63
4.75
4.75
4.75
4.75
4.57
4.63
F65

3.57
2.57
2.14
2
2.29
3.43
2.43
3.86
3.14
2.43
2.86
Dr. Kim Mean
4.68
4.57
4.18
4.15
4.49
4.68
4.60
4.65
4.55
4.51
4.56
(SoE Mean)
(4.18)
(4.00)
(4.10)
(3.78)
(4.16)
(4.53)
(4.55)
(4.42)
(4.32)
(4.31)
(4.40)
However, there are underlying issues of the phenomena above. Looking with a critical lens, let’s say that there is a consensus among students that a professor has legitimate English-speaking problems. This implies that they view their own language as good English or normal while marginalizing others’ as broken English or abnormal (Park & Wee, 2009). It reflects their ethnocentric language hegemony that perpetuates the nativeness ideology (Sealey, 2007). This causes nonnative-English-speaking professors to face pervasive structural disadvantages, but it is subtle enough to avoid raising serious discrimination or prejudice issues in the U.S. (Subtirelu, 2015). However, a critical quality that universities must be committed to is valuing people’s diverse backgrounds sharing diverse experiences, and knowledge creation and dissemination. Universities must create multicultural and international learning environments that foster respect among differences and various heritages, so that their students gain insight into other cultures and learn different perspectives by taking courses taught by and interacting with foreign people (Lee & Janda, 2006). Universities must promote rich cultural environments that enhance cross-cultural communication quality and intellectual, social, and personal development, which advance the educational benefits of all students (Adams, 2002; Boylan, Sutton, & Anderson, 2003; Lee, 2002; Lee & Janda, 2006; Smith, 2004). Further, when students interact with diverse people in classrooms, they often move from simplistic, dichotomous thinking (thinking in right-or-wrong or black-or-white perspectives) to multiplistic, relativistic thinking (thinking in multiple or gray perspectives), which nurture creative attitudes and creative thinking skills (Kim, 2016). The more experience students have with outsiders from different cultures in universities, the more creative attitudes and sophisticated intellectual processes they develop, which contributes to their problem-solving and creative-thinking skills, instead of developing the “they vs. we” dichotomy that inhibits creative thinking skills and thus innovation (Kim, 2016; Lee & Janda, 2006). Finally this cultivates societies where all people are equally respected, which symbolizes the societies’ democratic commitment to human dignity and equality (Smith & Necessary, 1994). Therefore, students must learn how to participate in the most dynamic and global learning practices where they improve their ability to work effectively in multicultural and international work environments (Lee & Janda, 2006).

2) Use of Assessment Feedback for Instructional Improvement
Dr. Kim expects her students to work hard. They learn early in the semester that she works harder than they do. This is rooted in the respect she has for her students and her belief that their successes are worth the extra effort. To her, learning as a two-way street, and the best teachers are students at heart who learn just as much from their students as their students learn from them. Since she first began teaching in Korea, she has continuously made conscious efforts to improve her teaching by modifying her methods and skills. She approaches teaching like an art, and her teaching and learning are an ever-evolving process, where she is constantly improving her skills as students’ learning tools and formats change. She constantly tweaks and tinkers with her course content, presentation style, and mode of discussion. She always welcomes new ideas and innovations that help make concepts more understandable to students. She recognizes the importance of refining her skills through pedagogical literature, soliciting frequent student evaluations, attending workshops, incorporating technology in her teaching, and consulting with her colleagues. Her personal success is dependent on what her students achieve, and also on their critical evaluations of teaching. She uses feedback from her students to measure her effectiveness and acceptance of new teaching methods and learning tools. She accepts their feedback and applies it to future semesters, adjusting her teaching methods to be more a more effective teacher. Most often these changes are subtle, but on occasion, they can be rather significant. Yet, the importance of change is not a function of quantity; rather, she is focused on enhancing her teaching methods in order to better serve the many needs of her students. Regardless of how those teaching methods may change from one semester to the next, she states that she will always work hard to bring her students successes, and when they achieve successes, everyone benefits.

In addition to the formal evaluation provided by the college, she uses an Exit Survey for students to give her informal feedback. She has tailored the document to inquire about specific aspects of her class. She asks students to comment on her required assignments (quizzes, literature review, mid-term, final, etc.) by asking, “how it was helpful or useful?” and “how it can be improved?” She makes use of the feedback by using it to make changes or adaptations to her assignments. She recognizes that as the years go by, different generations of students have different needs, and she wants to make sure that her class assignments evolve as needed. She also asks six open-ended questions including: i) what did you enjoy the most from this class? ii) what are the most useful skills or knowledge you have learned from this lass?; iii)What was the most challenging aspect of this class?; iv) how were your communications with Dr. Kim via e-mail? was the communication effective? helpful? quick?; v) what are some suggestions for future classes?; and vi) If any, what things did Dr. Kim provide that others cannot? These questions enable her to have a personal understanding of each students’ class experience. She is constantly trying to improve her teaching and the content of the course, and these questions allow her to dig a little deeper into her personal teaching effectiveness and what she can do to make the class more enjoyable and worthwhile in the future. She wants to know what the students found most challenging, so she can use many different approaches when teaching that particular topic. She also wants to know if she is exemplary in any aspect of her teaching by providing something that other professors do not. She has found this document enormously helpful and deeply analyzes the students’ feedback at the end of every semester.

7. Dr. Kim's Evaluation of and Future Plans for Teaching
Dr. Kim has found that, unfortunately, not many people in Education in America really care about creativity or innovation, and that, fortunately, most people in Business and other fields in America do focus on creativity and innovation. As a result, she has worked with faculty members from the School of Arts and Science and the School of Business teach interdisciplinary courses on creativity, innovation, and creative problem solving (BUAD 595: Solving Creative Problems at the Raymond A. Mason School of Business). According to the course description, “BUAD 595 is a sampler of approaches used by academics and practitioners in fields as diverse as advertising, product development, history, dance, physical chemistry, art and theater. During the semester, you’ll be challenged to synthesize your own approach to dealing with complex, ambiguous problems. Odds are that most of your academic experience since kindergarten has focused on mastering well-defined problems by employing theories, models and formulas that get you the right answer. This course is about developing your skills at addressing those situations where there’s not a rule for solving the problem, and where there’s probably not a knowable right answer. By embracing the uncertainty and developing the skill to find a novel, better answer, you have a real opportunity to distinguish yourself, and perhaps make a difference in the world.”

She has also worked with faculty members from the School of Business at George Mason University to teach creativity course (BUS 200 - Global Environment of Business). According to the course description, “this course fulfills Mason Core requirement in global understanding. As world becomes increasingly connected, business serves as core institution that mediates relations between individuals across national boundaries. This course provides overview of global environment of business through study of political economy, international institutions and international trade theories, and global conflicts and cooperation around issues (natural resources, labor, human rights, distribution of income, and the environment). It will address implications of topics for business.”

Because of her extensive research with meta-analyses, she has been contacted by many doctorate students who express their desire to learn this particular research method. She has developed course contents for a meta-analysis course to meet their needs and increase their competitiveness as potential candidates in the academic field. This course will introduce practical methods for conducting a quantitative synthesis of research. The conclusions drawn from multiple-study meta-analyses have greater statistical power than individual studies, classical literature reviews, or mean effect sizes. They have the ability to detect an overall effect and better extrapolate to affected populations.

Prospective students should understand Dr. Kim is an international professor with a foreign accent and indefinite tangible and intangible cultural differences. If you are taking one of her classes, it will be a difficult course that many students avoid taking, and she will have (almost too) high expectations that you may think are beyond your capabilities. She will recognize that you will be immersed in a new “country” or “world” of research, where you are presented with new concepts, new standards, new cultural expectations, and expressed in difficult statistical dialects, in addition to her own foreign accent. But you will work hard, and she will work even harder, to assure her teaching continues to beat the odds. She reaches you despite all of the differences, obstacles, and barriers. She will find a common interest with you in the very core of the education process: your own success. She measures her successes by yours. Nothing is more important to her than for you to master the subject matter, and she will do what it takes to share her passion for the subject matter and work with you toward this goal. You will earn your grade in her class, and you will come to appreciate that she requires your hard work because she respects you, and because she knows you are capable of achieving beyond your expectations. You will eventually understand and trust that she will give whatever it takes to make you feel as comfortable as she can in this microcosm, and that she subscribes to high standards of excellence. She will share her values with you. She will give you everything that you will need to reach her lofty goals. She will help you succeed in achieving them. It is her proudest accomplishment and the best measure of her teaching effectiveness that you are inspired to pursue further research because you will gain the confidence required to formulate and pursue new dreams and achievements. As long as you let her, even after you receive your degree(s), she will help you become even more competitive. You teach her, too, as she also gathers perspectives and understandings through her interactions with you. Certainly your successes will be well earned. But more importantly, her different perspectives of the world will give you totally new visions of the world. You will learn a wider appreciation not only for your own strengths but also for others’ strengths within a broader view.

Dr. Kim's teaching materials, including syllabi, demonstrate the extent and depth of her knowledge, her organizational and planning skills, and her belief in the importance of integrating a wide range of concepts related to the field of creativity and research into all her classes. They are also evidence in the value and importance she places in her teaching. She has worked hard to create teaching materials, and most of her students understand what is expected of them, and together they work with her through the materials. Her students’ evaluations confirm that she is able to establish mutual respect and a strong rapport with her students. Her students also report that they appreciate her 24/7 availability policy, which was reported in an article in the EMU newspaper (Article). To have students almost uniformly validate her teaching methods is a tremendous compliment and a great source of joy for her, though she knows there is always room for improvement. She continuously mentors her former students even after the semester ends. In recognition of her dedication to being an accessible and helpful mentor, she was selected as an Exemplary Faculty Mentor in both 2007 and 2008. Her pursuit of excellence in teaching was recognized with a university-wide award for excellence in teaching and advising. She was nominated for the 2007 Classroom Instruction Award, and she was awarded the 2008 Outstanding Faculty Award—The Beyond the Call of Duty Faculty Award. She was nominated for the 2009 Thomas Jefferson Teaching Award (Letter; Letter). She will continue to work hard to honor the caring teachers and mentors who helped her along her journey from Korea to America and to the future. She will keep growing as a teacher, passing the lessons and skills she has learned to others, to fulfill even greater potential. For this goal, she will also keep promoting creativity in ALL fields, especially in Education.

References
Adams, M. (2002). Charting cognitive and moral development in diversity classes. Diversity Digest, 6(1/2), 21-23.
Amin, M. E. (2000). Students’ sociocultural background as a discriminating factor in the evaluation of teaching in a bilingual university in central Africa. Teaching in Higher Education, 5, 435-445.
Anderson, K. J., & Smith, G. (2005). Students preconceptions of professors: Benefits and barriers according to ethnicity and gender. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 184-201.
Boylan, H. R., Sutton, E. M., & Anderson, J.A. (2003). Diversity as a resource in develop- mental education. Journal of Developmental Education, 27(1), 12-17.
Burdsal, C. A., & Bardo, J. W. (1986). Measuring students’ perceptions of teaching: Dimensions of evaluation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 63-79.
Connors, E. A. (1987). Report on the 1987 survey of new doctorates. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 34(7), 1081-1086.
DiPietro, M., & Faye, A. (2005). Online student-ratings-of-instruction (SRI) mechanisms for maximal feedback to instructors. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Professional and Organizational Development Network, Milwaukee, WI.
Edwards, A., Shaver, C., & Oaks, M. (2009). Computer-mediated word-of-mouth communication on RateMyProfessors.com: Expectancy effects on student cognitive and behavioral learning. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14:368–92.
Galbraith, K. (2002). British universities, long focused on class issues, begin to confront race; new law forces institutions to recognize the con- cerns of minority students and professors. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(15), A40(3).
Gilroy, M. (2007). Bias in Student Evaluations of Faculty? The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 17(19), 26-27.
Hamermesh, D. S., & Parker, A. M. (2005). Beauty in the classroom: Instructors' pulchritude and putative pedagogical productivity. Economics of Education Review, 24, 369-376.
Harrington, R., Southerland, A., & Johnson, J. (1993). Perceptions regarding non-American faculty in colleges and universities in the United States. CUPA Journal, 44, 29-32.
Jacobs, L. C., & Friedman, C. B. (1988). Stu- dent achievement under foreign teaching associates compared with native teaching associates. Journal of Higher Education, 59(5), 551-563.
Jackson, D. L., Teal, C. R., Raines, S. J., Nansel, T. R., Force, R. C., & Burdsal, C. A. (1999). The dimensions of students’ perceptions of teaching effectiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 580-596.
Kim, K. H. (2016). The creativity challenge: How we can recapture American innovation. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books
Lee, G. (2002). Realities and challenges facing multicultural education. Multicultural Education, 9(4), 36-37.
Lee, G-L., & Janda, L. (2006). Successful multicultural campus: Free from prejudice toward minority professors. Multicultural Education, 14(1), 27-30.
Neves, J. S., & Sanyal, R. N. (1991). Classroom communication and teaching effectiveness: The instructor. Journal of Education for Business, 66, 304-308.
Lee, G. (2002). Realities and challenges facing multicultural education. Multicultural Edu- cation, 9(4), 36-37.
Marsh, H. W. (1982). SEEQ: A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching. British Journal of Psychology, 52, 77-95.
Mason, P. M., Steagall, J. W., & Fabritius, M. M. (1995). Student evaluations of faculty: A new procedure for using aggregate measures of performance. Economics of Education review, 14, 403-416.
Park, J. S., & Wee, L. (2009). The three circles redux: A market–theoretic perspective on World Englishes. Applied Linguistics 30, 389–406.
Smith, B. P. (2007). Student rating of teacher effectiveness: An analysis of end-of-course faculty evaluations. College Student Journal, 41, 788-800.
Smith, B. P., & Hawkins, B. (2011). Examining student evaluations of black college faculty: Does race matter? Journal of Negro Education, 80(2), 149-162.
Smith, G., & Anderson, K. J. (2005). Students' ratings of professors: The teaching style contingency for Latino/a professors. Journal of Latinos and Education, 4, 115-136.
Subtirelu, N. C. (2015). “She does have an accent but…”: Race and language ideology in students' evaluations of mathematics instructors on RateMyProfessors.com. Language in Society, 44(1), 35-62.


On Our Last Day of Dr. Kim's Class
Spring -F65.jpg
Spring 2011 F65 Class


Spring 2011-663.jpg
Spring 2011 663 Class


Fall 2011 F65 Class.jpg
Fall 2011 F65 Class


Fall 2011 301 Class.jpg
Fall 2011 301 Class


Spring 2013-663.jpg
Spring 2013 663 Class


Fall 2013-V63.jpg
Fall 2013 V63 Class


Fall 2013-663.jpg
Fall 2013 663 Class


Spring 2014-F65-2.jpg
Spring 2014 F65-1 Class


Spring 2014-F65.jpg
Spring 2014 F65-2 Class


Fall 2015 F65 Class.jpg
Fall 2015 F65 Class

Fall 2015 663 Class.jpg
Fall 2015 663 Class


Spring 2016-F65.jpg
Spring 2016 F65 Class