Program Information s3

Division of Academic Affairs

Annual Assessment Report AY 10-11 Annual Assessment Plan AY 11-12 For Undergraduate & Graduate Degree Programs

Program Information Educational Doctorate (EdD) in Name of Program: Educational Leadership College: COE Prepared By: (Department Chair/Program Coordinator) Lorri J. Santamaría Date: 27 May 2011

Email Address: [email protected] Extension: 8520

PART A: Annual Assessment Report AY 10-11 Due by May 27, 2011 Please note: Should you need additional time to analyze data gathered in Spring 2011, please send an email requesting an extension to Jennifer Jeffries ([email protected]). 1) Please describe: A. the program student learning outcomes you focused on for assessment this year. B. the assessment activities you used to measure student learning in these areas. C. the results of your assessment(s). D. the significance of your results.

A. SLOs for the program are: 1. Demonstrate the ability to apply leadership theories and use leadership skills in the candidate’s unique organizational setting *‘laboratories of practice’. (Specific student learning outcomes are defined within the program coursework.)

2. Develop and apply research skills in order to address problems of practice within the candidate’s institution.

3. Evidence of application of the program *‘signature pedagogy’—critical theory/ applied social justice and equity in response to addressing recognized achievement gaps in educational contexts.

4. Complete a disciplined inquiry into a significant problem of practice by surveying and synthesizing related research, using an appropriate research methodology, engaging in critical analysis of data and articulating defendable conclusions and recommendations.

5. Completion of written doctoral dissertation *‘Capstone’ based on original research conducted in the workplace including a successful oral defense.

B. Assessment for measurement of SLO’s include: 1. Written reflections, in class discussions, and inclusion of workplace as *’laboratories of pratice’ as evidenced by coursework completed in EDLD 770A & B- Leadership Research Practicum.

LJS 5/27/11 1 2. Written reflections, in class discussions, and inclusion of *‘laboratories of practice’ research sites as evidenced by coursework completed in EDLD 780A & B Advanced Leadership Research Practicum.

3. Written reflections, in class discussions, and social justice and equity diversity project as evidenced by coursework completed in EDLD 715 Leadership for a Diverse Society and/ or dissertation research focused on the identified *‘signature pedagogy.’

4. Each qualifying paper and proposal will be read by three or four faculty members. Based on the collective scoring of the papers, students needing added guidance will receive direction and be given the opportunity to revise and re-submit the paper or proposal. Those fulfilling the quality criteria will advance to the next stage of their doctoral program.

5. Each dissertation *‘Capstone’ will be read by three or four faculty members (Chair and Committee). Based on the collective scoring of the papers, students needing added guidance will receive direction and be given the opportunity to revise and re- submit the paper commiserate with graduation requirements. Dissertations will be defended in the presence of the same faculty members. Those fulfilling the quality criteria will earn their doctoral degree.

C. Results of the assessments: 1. All students in cohorts 2, 3, 4, and 5 either conduct research in their workplace or their current or former educational organizational settings (*‘laboratories of practice’); evidencing successful completion of EDLD 770A & B- Leadership Research Practicum.

2. All students in cohorts 2, 3, 4, and 5 were successful in their workplace or at their current or former educational organizational settings (*‘laboratories of practice’); evidencing successful completion of EDLD 780A & B- Advanced Leadership Research Practicum.

3. All students in cohorts 2, 3, 4, and 5 were successful in their completion of coursework in EDLD 715 Leadership for a Diverse Society. Sixty percent of all dissertation research was focused on the identified *‘signature pedagogy’ —critical theory/ applied social justice and equity in response to addressing recognized achievement gaps in educational contexts.

4. All but one student in cohorts 2, 3, 4, and 5 were successful in passing qualifying papers. There are still 2 students in cohort 5 who need to defend proposals.

5. All students in cohort 2 (8/8) successfully defended their written dissertations (*Capstone) (all were original studies using the workplace as their laboratory). All students except for 1 in cohort 3 (19/20) successfully defended their written dissertations (all were original studies using the workplace as their laboratory). All students except for 3 in cohort 3 (19/21) successfully defended their written dissertations (all were original studies using the workplace as their laboratory). The 3 students are expected to defend prior to the end of 2011. Cohort 5 (13) is expected to defend their dissertation research before May 2012, their projected LJS 5/27/11 2 graduation date. All of their proposals have been successfully defended.

D. Significance of results: These results indicate program success with regard to appropriate and attainable SLO’s for the EdD program in each of the five areas indicated. When students are not successful in any area specified, there are supports built into the program in order to ensure student and candidate success. For example, when students are unable to use their *‘laboratories of practice’ due to change in employment directors or chairs accommodate and adjust research goals accordingly to enable completion of research in a timely manner. Another example is that all students receive feedback on their qualifying papers and when students do not pass the exam they are supported with assistance from one or more JDP faculty member with additional scaffolding prior to papers being resubmitted.

See attached current documents:  Syllabus for EDLD 715  Educational Leadership Doctoral Qualifying Paper Guidelines and Rubric  Ed.D. Guidelines for Proposal Development

*Asterisks indicate SLO components that are aligned with Ed.D. indicators identified by the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) a national effort aimed at strengthening the education doctorate, Ed.D. with which we are consortium members and for which Lorri Santamaría is a Principal Investigator.

2) As a result of your assessment findings, what changes at either the course- or program-level are being made and/or proposed in order to improve student learning? Please articulate how your assessment findings suggest the need for any proposed changes.

Diversity as a key component of applied social justice and equity in the program and the identified ‘signature pedagogy’ needs to be embedded throughout the program and not isolated to one course. This sentiment has been expressed in student evaluations of EDLD 715. There may be several reasons for this feedback. The most obvious could be: 1. There are inconsistent instructor/ faculty understandings of applied social justice equity and culturally relevant teaching at the doctoral level. 2. There is one course that explicitly mentions diversity, social justice and educational equity. 3. Additional perspectives are needed to substantiate diversity as related to educational leadership. 4. Individual student reports indicate need for diversity training for EdD faculty.

Changes implemented during the year: 1. A panel of culturally and linguistically and gender diverse JDP graduates presented content in EDLD 715 demonstrating multiple perspectives. 2. Having a two-quarter seminar course in the third year focused on the importance of cultural competence in educational leadership. 3. As a program we significantly increased the emphasis on including social justice and equity implications in qualifying paper exam and in coursework in EDLD 750A, B, and 760A, all core research courses. This helped the instructors focus more on including elements of social justice and equity in JDP coursework.

LJS 5/27/11 3 Changes for next year: 1. Encourage JDP faculty to attend Safe Zones LGBTQ training sessions offered by the LGBTQ center at CSUSM. 2. Continue to refine practices implemented this year that ensure a program that is culturally responsive, student centered, and one that is geared toward addressing the achievement gap in K-12 and HE educational contexts.

3) If you used the resources that were given to you as stated in your plan, please check here. If you used them differently, please provide specifics.

LJS 5/27/11 4 Syllabus for 715B California State University San Marcos College of Education

EDLD 715: Leadership for a Diverse Society Spring 2010

Instructors: Mark D. Baldwin, Ed.D. Patricia L. Prado-Olmos, Ph.D. Office: University Hall 411 and 401 Phone: (760) 750-4311: (760) 750-8535 Office Hours: by appt. before class E-Mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; Class Meeting times/places: See Course Syllabus; CSUSM, University Hall 443

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of the College of Education Community is to collaboratively transform public education by preparing thoughtful educators and advancing professional practices. We are committed to diversity, educational equity, and social justice, exemplified through reflective teaching, life-long learning, innovative research, and ongoing service. Our practices demonstrate a commitment to student-centered education, diversity, collaboration, professionalism, and shared governance. (adopted by COE Governance Community October, 1997)

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course will address theories and practices for achieving schools and classrooms that are informed by and built around the participation of diverse communities and cultures. The emphasis in this course is on how leadership intersects with socio-historical and socio-cultural theories that suggest the organization of schools and instruction is critical to student inclusion and outcomes. A basic premise of this course is that a socially just learning theory begins with using all of the resources and knowledge of families, communities and cultures in formulating policy and practice.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to:  Describe how educational leadership is influenced by socio-historical and socio-cultural contexts.  Describe their developing identity as an educational leader and researcher in a diverse society.  Develop a plan of action for engaging in transformative conversations focused on equity for all in their workplace communities.  Link research on issues of social justice with their own research focus.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Writing: In keeping with the All-University Writing Requirement, all courses must have a writing component of at least 2,500 words (approximately 10 pages) which can be administered in a variety of ways. In this course, this requirement is fulfilled through the written assignments.

Appeals: Every student has the right to appeal grades, or appeal for redress of grievances incurred in the context of any course. Disputes may be resolved informally with the professor, or through the formal appeal process. For the latter, consult Dr. Bridget Blanshan, Dean of Students.

LJS 5/27/11 5 Ability: Every student has the right to equitable educational consideration and appropriate accommodation. Students having differing ability (mobility, sight, hearing, documented learning challenges, first language/English as a second language) are requested to contact the professor at the earliest opportunity. Every effort will be made to accommodate special needs. Students are reminded of the availability of Disabled Student Services, the Writing Center, technology assistance in the computer labs, and other student support services available as part of reasonable accommodation for special needs students.

Students with Disabilities Requiring Reasonable Accommodations . Students are approved for services through the Disabled Student Services Office (DSS). This office is located in Craven Hall 5205, and can be contacted by phone at (760) 750-4905, or TTY (760) 750-4909. Students authorized by DSS to receive reasonable accommodations should meet with their instructor during office hours or, in order to ensure confidentiality, in a more private setting.

CSUSM ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY

“Students will be expected to adhere to standards of academic honesty and integrity, as outlined in the Student Academic Honesty Policy. All written work and oral assignments must be original work. All ideas/materials that are borrowed from other sources must have appropriate references to the original sources. Any quoted material should give credit to the source and be punctuated with quotation marks.

Students are responsible for honest completion of their work including examinations. There will be no tolerance for infractions. If you believe there has been an infraction by someone in the class, please bring it to the instructor’s attention. The instructor reserves the right to discipline any student for academic dishonesty in accordance with the general rules and regulations of the university. Disciplinary action may include the lowering of grades and/or the assignment of a failing grade for an exam, assignment, or the class as a whole.”

OUR LEARNING COMMUNITY

The following Community Agreements will serve as the foundational principles by which we relate to each other as we learn together. As a community, we can add specifics to these principles as we need.

Community Agreements

 We speak from our own experience

 We are open to hearing others

 We share air time

 We are willing to have our thinking challenged

 We respect confidentiality

 We share experiences that are issue focused, not necessarily who said it or where

E-MAIL & ONLINE DISCUSSION PROTOCOL

Electronic correspondence (e-mail and on-line discussion) is a part of your professional interactions. If you need to contact the LJS 5/27/11 6 instructor or other students, e-mail is often the easiest way to do so. It is our intention to respond to all received e-mails in a timely manner. Please be reminded that e-mail and on-line discussions are a very specific form of communication, with their own form of nuances and meanings. For instance, electronic messages sent with all upper case letters, major typos, or slang, often communicates more than the sender originally intended. With that said, please be mindful of all e-mail and on-line discussion messages you send, to your colleagues, to faculty members in the College of Education, or to persons within the greater educational community. All electronic messages should be crafted with professionalism and care. Things to consider: • Would I say in person what this e-mail specifically says? • How could this e-mail be misconstrued? • Does this e-mail represent my highest self? • Am I sending this e-mail to avoid a face-to-face conversation?

In addition, if there is ever a concern with an electronic message sent to you, please talk to that person face-to-face to correct any confusion.

For more guidance see Core Rules of Netiquette at http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html

Discussion Posting (Value Added Model) When replying to a posting in the discussion area (or through a Web Blog) by another student, instructor, or guest, you must refer to the person by name and refer to their comments within your posting. To Add Value, your response must do one of the following: give an example of what the prior post had described; provide a different perspective of the topic posted; OR expand upon the idea posted in the message by including more detail and depth. The instructor will provide feedback in the first few modules to support understanding of this concept. Peers will also be asked to review how others conform to this aspect of the course discussions.

ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION

The Educational Leadership Program is designed to allow students to explore theories of leadership, reflect on practice and solve problems together through the cohort model. Due to the dynamic and interactive nature of courses in the program, all students are expected to attend all classes and participate actively. At a minimum, students must attend more than 80% of class time, or s/he may not receive a passing grade for the course at the discretion of the instructor. Should the student have extenuating circumstances, s/he should contact the instructor as soon as possible. (Adopted by the COE Governance Community on 12/19/97)

Because of the program design attendance is critical. As we promote system–thinking and inquiry-based problem solving in our learning opportunities, we require all of our professional students to be on time and present at each class meeting. Students are expected to have read assigned materials by the date indicated in the syllabus and should be prepared to discuss readings individually or in variously structured groups. Attendance expectations apply to all instructional activities, in class, on-line and at other events included in course syllabi.

LJS 5/27/11 7 GRADING STANDARDS

Grading Scale:

General Evaluation/Feedback Rubric

Does not meet standards (B or Approaching Standards Meets Standards (A) below) (A-/B+) • Includes some of the required • Includes required elements as • Includes required elements as elements as delineated in the delineated in the syllabus delineated in the syllabus syllabus • All components of the • All components of the • Some components of the assignment are included assignment are included assignment are included • Provides concrete details of the • Provides concrete details of the • Provides a few concrete details information required for the information required for the of the information required for assignment assignment and makes clear the assignment • Includes personal viewpoints connections to class discussions, • Includes personal viewpoints • Good organization readings and activities • Organization hard to follow • Has few, if any, mechanical • Insightful commentary using • Many mechanical errors, errors including APA format personal viewpoints supported by including APA format • Holds interest – is interesting to current learning • Hard to read read • Presents clear and logical • Little sentence/vocabulary • Some sentence/vocabulary organization of thoughts variety variety • Has few, if any, mechanical errors including APA format • Holds interest – is engaging and thought-provoking to the audience • Uses a sophisticated scholar researcher vocabulary and sentence structure

If you are unable to submit an assignment by the due date, it is your responsibility to contact the instructor before the due date.

This rubric represents general guidelines we will use to evaluate your work. As a doctoral candidate it is critical that you communicate your ideas through multiple formats. The written word is a powerful demonstrator of your knowledge, skills and disposition. Therefore, we hold high expectations of your performance and we are committed to providing you with useful and meaningful feedback that will support your learning and continued development as an educational leader.

In general, we believe a doctoral student:

 Completes all assignments on time and demonstrates the ability to summarize, analyze, and/or reflect at sophisticated and complex levels.  Varies sources of information for assignments, demonstrating high degree of effort in pursuing varied perspectives around important educational issues.  Completes all the reading assignments and develops thoughtful and thorough responses.  Produces work that reveals a strong commitment to self-discovery and learning.  Produces work at a highly professional level in terms of both writing and content.  Develops a high quality presentation, demonstrating significant learning around a contemporary issue.  Presents confidently and intelligently, demonstrating effective teaching skills.  Completes assignments in/out of class with a focus on learning and exploration, pushing him/herself to better understand the profession through quality work.  Attends every class meeting and is fully engaged during class.  Pushes him/herself to new understandings by participating in discussions, sharing his/her opinions, and valuing others’ perspectives.  Contributes to the positive environment of the class by respecting all members. Grading Emphasis:

LJS 5/27/11 8 Each written assignment will be graded approximately 80% on content and context (detail, logic, synthesis of information, depth of analysis, etc.), and 20% on mechanics (grammar, syntax, spelling, format, uniformity of citation, etc.). All citations, where appropriate, will use APA format. Consult Library Services for the Manual of Citation of the American Psychological Association, or

REQUIRED TEXTS

EDLD 715 Reader – University Reader

Fullan, Michael (2008). The Six Secrets of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 978-0-7879-8882-1

Gould, S. J. (1996). The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc. ISBN: 0-393-31425-1

Wink, J. (2004). Critical Pedagogy: Notes from the Real World (3rd edition). Boston. Pearson. ISBN: 0-205-41818-X

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

NOTE: The instructors for this course will always work in a timely way with students if a change to the syllabus or materials is necessary.

Assignments:

All assignments are due on the dates indicated. Assignments must be word processed, double-spaced and with standard margins. It is expected that all assignments will reflect graduate-level composition and exposition. Use of electronic spelling and grammar checking is encouraged.

1. Attendance and Participation 20% 2. Reading Response Review 15% 3. Learning Module 15% 4. Closing the Achievement Gap Paper 25% 5. Fullan Discussion & Final Paper 25%

1. Attendance and Participation (20%)

As graduate students, you are expected to take an active role in class and class activities. The quality of this course rests on the quality of YOUR participation. Toward this end, you are expected to attend every class, be prepared to contribute and be an active participant.

2. Reading Response Review (15%)

Write your reaction to all readings assigned for Session 1. Your review should demonstrate your “thinking” about what it is you have read (it should not be merely a summary). Look for common themes among the articles. This is an opportunity for you to present your perspective on the themes (Name it) and share your experiences and struggles with the ideas (Reflect on it). At the end of each review, identify one action that could be developed based on your understanding of the issue (Act on it). Each review must be, at minimum, 3 pages. Due April 13, 2010. Submitted online.

3. Learning Module (15%)

The paper for the Learning Module requires a thorough reading of Gould’s chapters 5 and 6. Write an analysis of Gould’s perspective on the role of race and psychological testing as it impacts issues of social justice and equity. As a leader and researcher, why is it important to understand the historical foundations of psychometrics? Next, in the context of your analysis, detail your views on how

LJS 5/27/11 9 standardized assessments have impacted the ways educators have begun to define and measure academic success and accountability in public schools. The paper should be, at minimum, 4 pages. Due April 23, 2010. Submitted online.

4. Closing the Achievement Gap – Connections to Individual Research Areas (25%)

A primary goal of this doctoral program is that you will engage in research with a focus on the social justice goal of closing the achievement gap. In continuing with the general course theme of “naming it,” this 4-5 page assignment will support you to name, think critically and act on the issues of social justice related to your individual research area. In addition, this assignment will ask you to consider how your growing knowledge about your topic of interest may directly and immediately impact your workplace. Due May 17, 2010. Submitted online.

Organize your paper according to the sections outlined below.

Part 1 – Name it

• Identify an area of interest • Name how your topic can be framed within a social justice lens (Discuss how this topic is related to social justice, equity, diversity and the achievement gap?) • Explain why your topic is of interest to you.

Part 2 – Think Critically

• Reference (and add to) your developing annotated bibliography • Explore your current understanding of the selected topic in general. • Explain how your individual research area can be developed to more directly focus on closing the achievement gap.

Part 3 – Act

• Identify transformative conversations that will result from your research. • Describe how this transformative conversation will impact the achievement gap. • Outline the ways your developing research knowledge base might impact your workplace right now.

5. Fullan Analysis, Discussion and Concluding Paper (25%)

Fullan’s Six Secrets of Change and several of the readings from Sessions 8-9 will be assigned to small groups. While you are responsible for reading the entire book and each of the readings, you and your small group colleagues will lead a focused discussion on the material assigned to your group. The discussion will focus on the connections or differences between the Fullan book and the various articles.

Each individual will also prepare a three page written reflection on Fullan’s book and the articles selected for the final session. Your reflection should identify and highlight key ideas, questions that emerged, and implications for leadership in your setting. The core

LJS 5/27/11 10 question to be answered: How will you strengthen your leadership in the area of social justice based on these readings as well as other learnings from the course? Due May 25, 2010 (Concluding Session). Hard copy to be submitted in class.

LJS 5/27/11 11 TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE

DATE TOPIC/ACTIVITY READING ASSIGNMENT

Session 1 - 4/6/10 NOTE: All readings, except Fullan and UH 443  Overview of Syllabus Wink, and Gould are available in the course reader.  Introductions  Socio-Historical Context Orfield Morawski Blount Bonilla-Silva Goodman

Session 2  Critical Pedagogy Wink – 3/4/5 4/9/10 UH 443  Positionality

Session 3 & 4  Critical Pedagogy 4/10/10  Positionality  Achievement Gap Assignment Due READING REVIEW Submit online by April 13

Session 5 LEARNING MODULE Gould: Chapters 5-6 4/23/10 On-Line Assignment Due LEARNING MODULE Submit online by April 23

Session 6  Transformative Tatum – 2 Articles 5/4/10 Conversations McIntosh UH 443 Nieto Kivel

Sessions 7  Transformative 5/7/10 Conversations UH 443 . White Privilege – Race again?

Louie Sessions 8 & 9  Leadership as Knowledge, Henze 5/8/10 Skill and Art Thompson UH 443 Thomas & Ely Levine McGee Banks Hargreaves Assignment Due ACHIEVEMENT GAP PAPER Submit online by May 17

Session 10 5/25/10  Closure

Assignment Due CONCLUDING PAPER Submit in person – Session 10

LJS 5/27/11 12 Educational Leadership Doctoral Qualifying Paper Guidelines and Rubric

Educational Leadership Doctoral Qualifying Paper

PURPOSE

1. Show you can identify a topic and seek and locate scholars and researchers who have studied and written on this topic. 2. Present and discuss the thinking of others around commonalities and differences, which reflect their ability to deconstruct, analyze and synthesize research. 3. Be able to critically reflect on the topic and to identify areas for future research.

OUTLINE OF CONTENT OF QUALIFYING PAPER

1. Introduction: statement of the problem as presented in the Creswell p. 71. a. What is your topic? b. Why are you curious about this topic? c. What problem could research on this topic help you solve? 2. State of knowledge/research on this topic: What have other scholars found on your research problem? This is the bulk of your paper. a. What are the major themes/findings that surfaced from your review on your topic? b. How would you characterize the research that has been done on your topic (e.g. research design, range of methodologies, populations, locations, size)? c. How have these studies informed the nature of the problem you identified? 3. Summary a. What can you conclude about the current state of the literature about your topic from the empirical studies you reviewed? 4. Areas for future research a. What did you learn that suggest areas for future research? b. How will a study on this topic be helpful to researchers and practitioners?

CRITERIA

1. The review needs to consist of at least 75% empirical (qualitative and quantitative) research. Other citations can include theoretical or conceptual articles. 2. Synthesizing and paraphrasing of the research findings is the goal; use direct quotes sparingly. 3. Paper should include at least 30 references of empirical studies or theoretical/conceptual articles. 4. Paper must be at least 20 pages in length,, excluding Title page, Abstract, and References. 5. On the title page use only your Student ID number and title of your paper. 6. Use APA for style and references.

LJS 5/27/11 13 RUBRIC

Qualifying Paper Reader Assessment

Student Number:

Title of Paper:

Required Paper Elements Meets Approaching Did Not Standards Standards Meet Standards Abstract (500 words maximum) Introduction (2-3 pages) Current State of Knowledge/ Research on topic (17-19 pages) Summary (2 pages) Implications for social justice (1-2 paragraphs) Implications for leadership (1-2 paragraphs) Areas for future research (1 page) Writing reflects synthesis and paraphrasing Length (20-25 pages, excluding title page and reference section) Application of writing conventions and APA style References (30) – 75% empirical (quantitative or qualitative) studies Note: Papers should focus on 1-2 major topics relevant to your area of interest

LJS 5/27/11 14 Ed.D. Guidelines for Proposal Development

Research studies vary in their topic, questions and methodology; nevertheless, there are generally common elements to most dissertation proposals. To assist you in preparing your research proposal, we suggest the following guidelines be used in consultation with your Committee Chair.

I. Title Page, with committee members listed

II. Abstract

III. Introduction A. Background/Context/Nature of the Study B. Statement of the Problem/Issue to be investigated including research questions C. Significance of the study

IV. Literature Review A. This section typically includes two to four sections that present what is known or not known in relationship to the general topic of the dissertation and the specific themes of the research questions posted. B. In a theoretically grounded study, a review of the literature in regard to the theory and how it will guide the study is presented.

V. Methodology Section Content (the format of this section will vary depending on the nature of the study)

A. Design (Qualitative/Quantitative) B. Context or Site of the Study (more typical in qualitative studies) C. Participants D. Data to be collected 1. For quantitative studies this usually involves a hypothesis, a description of variables to be measured, instruments to be used and how they will be administered. 2. For qualitative studies: discussion of interviews (number, who, when, protocols), observations (number, when, where, protocols), focus groups (number, who, when, protocols), and/or document analysis (which ones, why, approach to be used). Propositions can also be offered as discussed in Yin, 2003 E. Data Analysis 1. For quantitative studies, statistical tests and analyses that will be conducted. 2. For qualitative studies, discussion of how data will be coded, themes identified, patterns illuminated and if any computer data analysis systems will be used. F. Issues of Validity, Reliability, Trustworthiness G. Ethical Issues and Role of Researcher H. Limitations of the Study

LJS 5/27/11 15