Skip to main content

Natalie D. Ellis

Title: Assistant Professor

Department: Design

College: College of Visual Arts and Design

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae Link

Education

  • PhD, University of Missouri, 2015
    Major: Human Environmental Science
    Specialization: Architectural Studies: Emphasis in Environment and Behavior
  • Certificate, University of Missouri, 2013
    Major: Organizational Change
    Specialization: Organizational Analysis
  • MS, University of Missouri, 2013
    Major: Architectural Studies
  • BS, University of Missouri, 1995
    Major: Interior Design
  • BS, Missouri State University, 1982
    Major: Elementary Education

Current Scheduled Teaching

ADES 3640.501Interior Design: Design Studio IIISpring 2025
ADES 3640.502Interior Design: Design Studio IIISpring 2025
ADES 2640.501Interior Design: Design Studio IFall 2024 Syllabus
ADES 2640.502Interior Design: Design Studio IFall 2024 Syllabus

Previous Scheduled Teaching

ADES 3645.001Interior Design: Building SystemsSpring 2024 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3635.001Interior Design: DetailSpring 2024 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3630.501Interior Design: Space Planning IIFall 2023 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3630.502Interior Design: Space Planning IIFall 2023 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3645.001Interior Design: Building SystemsSpring 2023 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3635.001Interior Design: DetailSpring 2023 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3630.501Interior Design: Space Planning IIFall 2022 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3630.502Interior Design: Space Planning IIFall 2022 Syllabus SPOT
ART 5900.711Special ProblemsFall 2022
ADES 3645.001Interior Design: Building SystemsSpring 2022 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3635.001Interior Design: DetailSpring 2022 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3610.501Interior Design: Presentation TechniquesFall 2021 Syllabus SPOT
ADES 3610.502Interior Design: Presentation TechniquesFall 2021 Syllabus SPOT

Published Intellectual Contributions

    Abstracts and Proceedings

  • Pober, E.F., Ellis, N.D. (2017). Entry Level Practitioner Preparedness: Evaluation of CIDA Standards for Beginning Interior Design Professionals. Interior Design Educators Council.
  • Conference Proceeding

  • Kile, M.S., Ellis, N.D. (2020). The Quality of Work Environments for Early Childhood Educators’ Well-being from an Interdisciplinary Approach. Other. 2 (18) 171-181. Tallahassee, Forida, Publication & Research in Art, Architecture, Design and Environments (PARADE). http://architecturemps.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Architecture-MPS-18-2-2.pdf
  • Yi, Y., Ellis, N. (2020). Accessible Environment for People with Cognitive Disabilities: Toward an integrative theoretical framework and future research. Environmental Design Research Association.
  • Kile, M.S., Ellis, N.D. (2019). Continuity in Architecture: Enlightenment through and Immersive Studio Experience for Design Students at Fallingwater. (ACSF 11) 5. Architecture Culture Spirituality Forum. http://www.acsforum.org/symposium2019/works.htm
  • Ellis, N.D., , H. (2014). Creating Making: Theory, Modeling and Synthesis to Build: Theorizing the Studio Curriculum. IDEC SW Regional Conference.
  • Ellis, N.D. (2014). The Relationship between Office Work Typeology and Interior Attribute Preference. Philadelphia, PA, The Constructed Environment.
  • Journal Article

  • Ellis, N.D., Yi, Y. Systematic Review on Environmental Design for Adaptive and Problem Behaviors of People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Health Environments Research & Design. Health Environments Research & Design Journal.
  • Yi, Y., Ellis, N.D. (2023). Associations between environmental factors and adaptive skills of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in educational settings. 7 (1) 1-11. Elsevier Ltd..
  • Trippeer, B.C., Stark, J., Gam, H., Ellis, N., Morgan, B., Park, P. (2022). Sustainable Textiles for Health and Well-being: An Investigation of Curricular Opportunities for Fashion Design and Interior Design Student Collaboration. Other. 10 (2) 29. Oxfordshire, Taylor and Francis. https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/rftd20
  • Kwon, K., Ford, T.G., Salvatore, A.L., Randall, K., Jeon, L., Malek-Lasater, A., Ellis, N., Kile, M., Horm, D.M., Kim, S.G., Han, M. (2022). Neglected Elements of a High‑Quality Early Childhood Workforce: Whole Teacher Well‑Being and Working Conditions. Early Childhood Education Journal. Happy Teacher project. 50 157-168. Springer.
  • Kwon, K., Ford, T.G., Jeon, Malek-Lasater, A., Ellis, N.D., Randall, K., Kile, M.S., Salvatore, A. (2021). Testing a holistic framework for early childhood teacher well-being. Journal of School Psychology. Happy Teacher project. 86 178-197. Elsevier.
  • Kwon, K., Ford, T.G., Salvatore, A.L., Randall, K., Jeon, L., Malek-Lasater, A., Ellis, N.D., Kile, M.S., Horm, D.M., Kim, S., Han, M. (2020). Neglected elements of a high-quality early childhood workforce: Whole teacher well-being and working conditions. Early Childhood Education Journal. Springer Nature B.V..
  • Kwon, K., Ford, T., Salvatore, A., Randall, K., Jeon, L., Malek-Lasater , A., Ellis, N., Kile , M., Horm, D., Kim, S., Han, M. (2020). Neglected elements of a high-quality early childhood workforce: Whole teacher well-being and working conditions.
  • Kwon, K., Ford, T., Jeon, L., Randall, K., Ellis, N., Kile, M., Malek, A., Salvatore, A. (2020). Testing a holistic conceptual framework for early childhood teacher well-being.

Contracts, Grants and Sponsored Research

    Grant - Research

  • Kwon, K. (Principal), Ellis, N.D. (Co-Principal), Kile, M. (Co-Principal), "Early Childhood Teachers’ Physical and Psychological Well-being: Predictors and Consequences," sponsored by University of Oklahoma, Other, $15000 Funded. (2018 - 2019).
  • Kwon, K. (Principal), Ellis, N.D. (Co-Principal), Kile, M. (Co-Principal), "Infant Toddler Teachers’ Physical and Psychological Well-being: Predictors and Consequences," sponsored by University of Oklahoma, Other, $8500 Funded. (2018 - 2019).
,
Overall
Summative Rating
Challenge and
Engagement Index
Response Rate

out of 5

out of 7
%
of
students responded
  • Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE