Assessing Student Learning in the Doctoral Program

Assessing Student Learning in the Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies (ELPS)

College of Education

Iowa State University

http://www.educ.iastate.edu/elps

January 16, 2003 ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 2 Table of Contents

Learner Outcomes for Doctoral Students in ELPS...... Page 3 Leadership, Research, Communication, Assessment and Evaluation, Educational Foundations, and Technology Utilization

Curriculum Alignment with Learner Outcomes in the ELPS Doctoral Program...... Page 5 Faculty Survey (first page only)...... Page 5 Summary Matrix...... Page 6

ELPS Assessment Process Diagram...... Page 7

Portfolio Assessment for Doctoral Students in ELPS...... Page 8

Rubrics Used in ELPS...... Page 11 Leadership Rubric...... Page 11 Research Rubric...... Page 13 Oral Presentation Rubric...... Page 14 Written Communication Rubric...... Page 16 Interpersonal Communication Rubric...... Page 17 Intrapersonal Communication Rubric...... Page 18 Evaluation and Assessment Rubric...... Page 19 Foundations Rubric...... Page 21 Technology Rubric...... Page 23

The Capstone Experience for Doctoral Students in ELPS...... Page 25

Aligning Assessments with Intended Learner Outcomes...... Page 28

Department-Level Assessment in ELPS...... Page 30 Focus Group Assessment with Doctoral Students...... Page 30 Review of Portfolios...... Page 30 Review of Capstone Reports...... Page 30 Review of Dissertations...... Page 30 Alumni Surveys...... Page 30 ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 3 Learner Outcomes for Doctoral Students in ELPS Rooted in the six domains of the program:

. Leadership . Assessment and Evaluation . Research . Educational Foundations . Communication . Technology Utilization

Upon completion of the Educational Leadership and Policy Studies doctoral program, the student:

Leadership . Balances the forces of stability and change in order to maximize human and collective organizational performance . Applies techniques, technologies, and strategies that promote required or desired change . Uses periods of equilibrium for the organization to engage in reflexive periods of self-appraisal and reflection . Engages in rational leadership activities such as planning, evaluation, implementation, and assessment regarding results . Considers how and why organizations engage in change from simple adaptive changes with responses that are well within traditional boundary decisions to more radical alterations when the survival of the organization is at stake . Engages in both rational, technical change strategies and technologies, yet understands the impact of emotion and morale on organizational climate and performance . Understands that stability is a key to productivity . Balances the need for stability and the need for stimulation in the work environment . Creates parallelism between promoting human growth as well as organizational growth

Research . Comprehends the basic elements of research and inquiry . Conducts scholarly inquiry

Communication . Expresses ideas clearly both orally and in writing . Articulates his/her philosophy of life . Acknowledges his/her own beliefs and values . Subscribes to lifelong learning . Exhibits ethical standards consistent with professional commitment . Understands issues and trends in a multicultural non-sexist society . Demonstrates sensitive awareness and knowledge of one’s own cultural background and that of others . Works effectively with individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds . Listens and responds in an exemplary manner

Assessment and Evaluation . Demonstrates skills necessary for delineating, obtaining and providing information to assist in judging the worth and guiding the improvement of educational programs . Understands theoretical perspectives, evaluation and assessment models, professional standards, historical trends, and current issues in the fields of program evaluation and educational assessment

Educational Foundations . Understands education as a social institution . Utilizes diverse analytical and interpretative approaches appropriate for the study of education for persons of all ages . Understands the historical, philosophical, social, and cultural contexts of education for persons of all ages . Understands diverse philosophical orientations . Articulates the orientations in thought that underlie democratic systems of government and their relationships to education . Uses a comprehensive knowledge base about adults as learners within the contexts of their work

Technology Utilization . Understands the role, applications, and limitations of technology in learning and organizational processes ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 5

Faculty Survey (first page of survey included)

Curriculum Alignment with Intended Learner Outcomes Educational Leadership and Policy Studies—Fall 2001

Directions: For each course you teach that is required in your program area’s doctoral program, please complete one of these forms and give it to your program area coordinator by September 26. If you teach a Research and Evaluation course, please give the form to John Schuh. Program coordinators will turn in all forms to Marjorie with a list of required courses in the area by October 1.

As you complete the requested information for each learner outcome area, please review the description of the learner outcomes in that area. One convenient place to find them is the ELPS website. For each outcome area, complete two steps: a) Instructional Emphasis. Answer the question, “To what extent do students in this course receive instruction or have learning experiences that promote the development of the ELPS learning outcomes in this area? (Circle one: None, Somewhat, A Great Deal) b) Description. Briefly describe course experiences that promote outcomes in this area.

Name ______Course Number/Name ______Frequency Taught ______

1) Stewardship None Somewhat A Great Deal ______

2) Research None Somewhat A Great Deal ______

2 = “A Great2 =“A Deal” ofdevelopment ELPS the learning the outcomesin area? KEY Communications Communications Communication Communication Outcomes Assessment & ELPS Doctoral Interpersonal Intrapersonal Foundations Learner Technology Educational for for Leadership Evaluation Utilization

Research Student Written Oral

instructional emphasis Assessment Page 6 Summary Matrix: Curriculum Alignment with Learner Outcomes in 1 2 1 4 5 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 Educational Leadership and Policy Studies Doctoral Program 1.5 1.5 1 2 1 1 1 5 5 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 2 2 5 5 1 0 1 : what To extent dostudents in course this receive instruction learning orhave experiences promote that the 1 =“Somewhat” 1.5 1.3 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 4 5 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 6 5 5 1 2 0 1 2 2 2 1 1 8 5 5 0 1 0 Ed AdminEd 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 5 5 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 5 7 5 0 =“None” 1.3 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 6 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 6 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 1 2 1 2 2 3 0 6 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 5 0 6 1.7 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 6 Fall 2001 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 6 0.5 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 7 5 Hg Ed Hg 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 9 5 1.5 0.5 1.5 H 1 1 2 1 2 0 5 1 6 0.5 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 6 6 2 2 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 5 6 6 0.5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 A 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 1 6 ELPS B 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 5 1 6 C 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 5 1 6 Res Ev Res 1.8 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.5 D 0 0 2 1 5 1 6 E 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 5 1 6 - - F 0 1 1 2 1 2 0 0 1 5 1 6 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 0 5 5 OLHRD 2 0 2 0 0 1 2 2 0 2 5 5 2 0 2 0 0 1 2 2 0 3 5 5 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 5 5 0 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 8 5 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 9 5 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 8 6 0 1 0 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 6 6 ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment *Year 1 *Year assessment KEY:

assessment Page 7 Self- Self- 1 1 POS CommitteePOS POS Committee Approval ofPOS assessment Discussion ofSelf- Approval ofPOS Approval assessment Discussion ofSelf- *Year 1 *Year meeting meeting *Dates are a general*Dates are a estimate. may from vary They student student to Student= self-assessment the in major six domains of learning Formal meetings= with committee POS assessment assessment *Year 2-3*Year Self- Self- 2 2 ELPS Assessment Process Capstone presentation Portfolio presentation Capstone presentation Portfolio presentation assessment Preliminary oral Preliminary oral assessment *Year 2-3*Year *Year 2-3 Self- Self- 3 3 exam exam Beginning offinalyear Dissertation Dissertation Proposal meeting Proposal meeting FINAL ORAL Final year (Dissertation Defense) ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 8 Portfolio Assessment for Doctoral Students in ELPS

Introduction There are two key components of portfolio assessment for ELPS doctoral students. The first is the portfolio assessment process, and the second is the presentation portfolio.

The portfolio assessment process has been designed to support learning and development in the six major program domains throughout the doctoral program. Through this process, students monitor and reflect on their learning in each domain. Portfolio assessment is an opportunity for students to understand and celebrate their own learning, to set goals for improvement, and to receive feedback from important stakeholders such as the major professor, committee members, and other individuals who may be involved in the student’s program.

As part of the portfolio assessment process (see previous page), each student reviews his/her learning in the six domains three times during the program. At each review, the student assesses the current level of proficiency in each domain, selects an example of work he/she has produced in the domain, writes a reflective self-assessment about learning in the domain, and seeks feedback from the major professor.

After the third self-assessment, the materials from all the reviews are compiled in a presentation portfolio, using the guidelines below. The presentation portfolio is submitted to the Program of Study (POS) committee so that it can be discussed at the prelim orals. The discussion at the meeting should focus not only on the student’s current level of achievement but also on the student’s learning history, i.e., the process through which current achievement was developed. (In addition to discussing the presentation portfolio at the prelim orals, the POS committee will also discuss the capstone project.)

The presentation portfolio is a learning portfolio rather than a professional portfolio. That is, it is a “representative, purposeful and selective collection of one’s work drawn primarily from classroom work . . . . It documents . . . evidence of learning, growth, and change—in essence a learning history is captured” (Arter, 1995). In contrast, a professional portfolio is a summative collection of best work that might be presented to potential employers. Although the ELPS portfolio assessment process focuses on portraying the learning process over time, it should assist students in identifying materials that could be useful in developing a professional portfolio.

Privacy Policy Each student’s presentation portfolio will be shared with the student’s POS Committee. It may also be viewed by ELPS department assessment committees whose charge will be to review the work of several students as a group in order to evaluate learning outcomes at the department level. No presentation portfolio will be shared with any other individual unless the student gives permission. ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 9

Portfolio Assessment Guidelines

Student’s Periodic Self-Assessment The student will review and analyze his/her achievement in the six major learning domains three times during the doctoral program:

1. upon entry (Self-Assessment 1) 2. at the midpoint of the course-taking period (Self-Assessment 2) 3. after the preliminary oral examination (Self-Assessment 3).

Each of the three self-assessments should result in a narrative reflection for each domain. The purpose of the narrative reflection is to portray the student’s learning history. Therefore, the student should include—but not feel limited to—the following elements:

a) The student’s self-rating of current performance in the domain. Using the department rubric associated with the domain, the student will provide a rating for each criterion in the rubric. (When addressing the Communication domain, students should address all four components: written communication, oral communication, interpersonal communication, and intrapersonal communication. )

b) A self-assessment narrative in which the student shares insights about his/her own learning in the domain, including both strengths and areas in need of improvement. In the narrative, the student should explain the self-ratings on the rubric criteria. He/she should analyze how learning is progressing in the domain and give specific examples of relevant learning experiences. The student should also explicate key elements referred to in the intrapersonal communication rubric—personal philosophy, beliefs, values, and ethical perspectives.

c) A sample artifact that illustrates points made in the narrative, along with a discussion of what it represents. At the time of the first self-assessment (soon after entering the doctoral program), the student will select artifacts from previous professional and life experiences. At the time of the second and third self-assessments, the student will select most artifacts from courses taken in the program, but when appropriate, the student can include examples of out-of-class learning.

d) The student’s goals for improvement.

The student should save the materials generated from each self-assessment for eventual inclusion in the presentation portfolio. (See directions below for compiling the presentation portfolio.)

Stakeholder Involvement At the time of each self-assessment, the student will share and discuss the narrative reflections for the six domains with either the major professor alone or with the major professor and Program of Study (POS) committee. For example, the student will share and discuss the narrative reflections resulting from first self-assessment with both the major professor and the POS committee during the POS meeting. This provides an opportunity for the committee and the student to discuss the student’s strengths and areas in need of improvement when the Program of Study is designed and approved. ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 10

The second self-assessment takes place during the course-taking period of the student’s program. The student will discuss the narrative reflections from this self-assessment with the major professor. If the major professor so desires, he/she may write a brief response to the student to be retained for inclusion in the presentation portfolio.

After the third self-assessment, the student will prepare the presentation portfolio and distribute it to the members of the POS committee for discussion at the prelim orals. At that meeting, the student and committee will discuss both the student’s learning history and the student’s current level of achievement in the six domains. The committee will assist the student by offering insights into the self-analyses that the student has presented. The student and committee will also discuss the direction of the student’s future growth and development.

Compilation of the Presentation Portfolio Following the third self-assessment, the student will prepare a reflective narrative on the portfolio as a whole. To prepare for this narrative, the student should review the material from the three self-assessments. The reflective narrative on the portfolio as a whole should summarize the student’s insights about what the portfolio assessment process has meant to him or her, as well as an overview of the growth the student has experienced in the program.

The student should then prepare a paper version of the presentation portfolio to share with committee members prior to the prelim orals. (A CD may also be included with the paper version.) The presentation portfolio should include the following elements:

1) Table of Contents 2) Student’s Program of Study 3) Student’s Vita or Resume 4) Reflective Narrative on the Portfolio as a Whole 5) Materials for Each Learning Domain a) Copy of ELPS Rubric(s) for the Domain b) Materials from Entry Self-Assessment (Self-Assessment 1) c) Materials from Midpoint Self-Assessment (Self-Assessment 2) d) Materials from Final Self-Assessment (Self-Assessment 3)

The student should organize the material to facilitate movement through the presentation portfolio. In the case of the paper version, the student should consider dividers, labels, plastic sleeves, dated entries, etc. In the case of an electronic version, the student should design the home page and system of links in a way that communicates the portfolio’s organization to the reader and is easy to use.

Reference Arter, J (1995). Portfolios for assessment and instruction. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearing House. http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed388890.html results. self-appraisal and and reflection; ability knowledgeof engage to leadership rational in activities as planning, such evaluation,implementation, and assessment regarding apply techniques, technologies,and strategies that promote required or desired change; periodsequilibrium using of the for organization engage to reflective in of periods Leadership:

process Facilitating group Balance: and impacts models, processes, Understanding change Change: effectively organizations cultural aspects of contextual and Utilizing situational, Balance: and goals of mission, vision, toward achievement Fostering actions Balance: Criteria ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment

The abilityto the stability balance forces of in and change ordermaximize to and collective human organizational performance; knowing when how to and Page 23 minutes. a e.g.,within specified time 30 limit, withsatisfaction agreed uponresponses members’ and commitmentmaximize to consensual solutionstowards which empowers groupLeads and members outcomes. enhance educational practice and to stimulateability to potential benefits andprocesses, as, well impacts, as the limitations changeand of models, benefitsArticulates distinguishes the and andsub-group organization. productivity of andin individuals the the and leadbalance that will to improvement areorganization which attain necessary to andcontextual, culturalof aspects an identifythe ableIs to situational, completed. when worktranslated evaluated into tasks, and agenda or isplan easily which clear, andtomaximized an lead inclusive action goals mission and vision, can be elements the which and of interactions Analyzes a in situation hypothetical Exemplary Iowa State University DepartmentIowa University Educational State of Leadershipand Policy Studies e.g., 30minutes. responses within specific time, a group with satisfaction agreed consensual solutions resulting in empower members group in hesitant butIs able and to lead practice and outcomes. potential benefits to educational some difficultyin relating the models, and processes impacts. Has benefits limitations change and of Articulates and distinguishes the of organizations. and individuals balance improved and productivity aspects an of organization relative to situational, contextual cultural and Has someunderstanding the of and plan goalsand development. relatedness mission vision, among situation exhibiting the inter- of the analyzesdifficulty, hypothetical a Understands minor and, with Proficient Leadership Rubric (7-8-00) Levels of AchievementLevels of time period. agreed responses an after extended resulting satisfaction in group with members in consensual solutions leading empowering group and Requires significant assistance in practice and outcomes. benefits that enhance educational and the to inability stimulate potential impacts. Has understanding limited of models, and change processes distinguish benefits limitations the and limited abilityIs to in articulateand organizations. individualsproductivity of and relative to balance improved and and aspects of cultural organization an identifying situational, the contextual Has understanding difficulty and evaluative agenda. relationship into and planning, work unablegoals. Is to translate this relatedness mission and vision, of process of inter- the analysisand Has someknowledge the about Marginal if extended.if specified time 30minutes, limit, e.g. even regarding a responses their within members’ commitment/satisfaction develop consensus a results in which the notIs able or to lead a empower to group and impacts. limitations change processes, of models, notIs able and to interpret benefits the stability between equilibrium. chaos and or within involving conditions settings not identify able settings to contrasting the organizational in any Is balance setting. situationally aspects unique of organizational culture, context, or notIs able any relate to identifyor specific action agenda. or plan and translate goalsor them into coherent a interactive mission, vision, nature between situation exhibitunderstanding the or an of notIs able a to analyze hypothetical Unacceptable management practices Applying traditional Stability: chaos and equilibrium balance between Understanding the Stability: conditionhuman and onthe impact its dynamics change of Understanding the Change: ofimpact change Understanding the Change: Criteria ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 22 and maintain organizationaland stability. activities andvision statements to create goals,missions,organization the and via to the attain offused purposes stated the implementedorganizing be must and ofpractices and planning, influencing, explain able managementIs the how to of satisfaction. productivityhuman and re-balanced,can be improved leading to which eitherin risk settings at chaotic or prescriptions recommendationswrite or fromequilibrium not. thosethat are Can balancedare chaos between and distinguish ableIs work that to settings performance. onhuman impact its and conditions of oflimitations dynamics the and change thesynthesize potential gainsand make ableIs informed to choices, and organizational system. change of andimpact within outside an analyze ableIs and to articulatethe Exemplary organizational stability. and activities of vision organization via goals,mission the of of purposes stated the implementation) to achievement the influencing, organizing and management practices (planning, relationship of traditional generallyIs to explain able the and productivity. human improved rebalancingor involving conditions and settings contrasting identifythe a setting. able work Is to analyze concept of organizationalbalance in generallyIs to identifythe able performance. conditionson human and dynamics and change impact of its gains and of limitations the choices and the synthesize potential generallyIs to make able informed organizational system. within an outside of and and impact articulatethe change of With able limitations, to is analyze ISU ELPSISU Leadership 2 Rubric Page Proficient Levels of AchievementLevels of traditional management practices. developed and the interrelated in andvisions can be purposes stipulatedhow goals,missions, significant difficulty explaining in Has exhibits someunderstanding but between equilibrium. chaos and within stability involving settings contrasting conditions or settings settings. identifying difficulty the Has of work organizationalbalance in demonstratingdifficulty concept the Has understanding little some and conditions performance. and change its and onhuman impact gains and of of limits dynamics the choices and synthesizing potential the Has in difficulty making informed of organizationalsystem. an ofimpact within change outside and analyzingdifficulty and explainingthe Has understanding limited and Marginal organizing. practice planning, influencing of ,and interrelated in traditional management the andvisions can be purposes developedand visually stipulated how goals,missions or notIs able or to demonstrate verbally stability between equilibrium. chaos and or within involving conditions setting not identify able settings to contrasting the organizational in work balance Is settings. understanding concept the of of notIs able to demonstrate an performances. and onhuman impact its and conditions and of of limitations dynamics the change compare contrast potential and the gains notIs able informed to choices, make nor and organizationalsystem. outside an nor of impact articulatethe within change notIs able impact the to explain chance, of Unacceptable

ELPS Doctoral Student Research: Published ResearchPublished Research of Nature analysis research skills of Principles and data education, practice knowledge, and to research Contributions of research standardsEthical for conducting rigor Research methods, and questions, Assessment Page 23 Comprehending theComprehending basic elementsof inquiry; research and scholarly conducting inquiry. Criteria thorough understanding.thorough sophisticated manner, revealing a research analysis a data in Employs and principles the skills of and practice. research education, knowledge, to articulates the of contributions Eloquently and insightfully and concern. research with ethically awareness practices always and conducts Advocates ethical research for    findingsthe research. from published critiques, and summarizes, interprets Insightfully completely and nature of research. a broad-based the knowledge of quantitative research, thus displaying views qualitativeand underlying Eloquently articulates principles and Iowa University State of Department Educational Leadership and Policy Studies all aspectsresearch of pursuits applying highest standards to research byinsightfully rigor Reveals understanding of researchduring investigations. Employs sophisticated methods theory. questions that derive from groundbreaking research Develops originaland Exemplary understanding. fashion, basic revealing Analyzes data research standard in a and practice. research education, knowledge, to Explains major the of contributions Always research conducts ethically.    research. main findingsthe from published Critiques, summarizes, interprets and research. basic nature of the knowledge of quantitative research, thus displaying underlying qualitativeand Articulate principles views and Research RubricResearch (7-8-00) revealing understanding basic research thus pursuits, Applies standards rigor of to investigations. appropriately research during Employs standard methods questions to related theory. clearly research stated Develops appropriate and Levels of Achievement Proficient fashion. researchanalyze a data standard in guidance Needs substantial to comprehensive. practice,and butare explanations not toresearch education, knowledge, ofCan discuss somecontributions unintentional. relatively are violations minor and researchConducts Any ethically.    readers few insights. gain butresearch, workuneven and is mainpublished findingsthe from summarizes,Critiques, and interprets based, cohesive. or are clear,explanations broad- not butquantitative research, qualitativeandunderlying Refers toand principles views difficulty applyingdifficulty them. superficially butrigor has discuss ableIs standards to of notmay alwaysappropriate. be investigationsuseresearch but duringstandard methods part,For most the employs underpinnings. with theoretical little questions Develops research adequate Marginal revealing little understanding. little revealing dataresearch analysis ineffectively, principles Employs skills of and practice.and toresearch education, knowledge, Cannot contributions articulatethe of concern. researchViolates without ethics    researchof methodology. published using research knowledge critique unableIs findings the to of research. sketchy naturea of the knowledge of thusquantitative research, displaying qualitative underlying views and andArticulates principles the poorly pursuits. any aspectsresearchto of to standardsFails apply rigor of investigations. research during inappropriateEmploys methods questions.research Develops unresearchable Unacceptable Oral Communication:Oral Style Organization Content: Content of Depth Materials) Handouts, Computer-Generated (e.g., Transparencies, Posters, Slides, Use Communication of Aids ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 23 Criteria Expressing ideas clearly when communicating orally. communicating ideas when clearly Expressing  professional manner. presentation. They prepared in are a Communication aidsenhance the by all. front group the can of be and heard Speaker comfortable clearly is in reading of paper. a audience NOT understanding. is a It planned conversation, paced for for audience. the is Presentation a Level presentation of is appropriate of reasoning. organized. Listener can followline Presentation clear, is and logical issues. Listeners insights. gain theory illuminate included are to relevant literature. Applications of concepts and drawing upon theories, complete explanation key of Speaker accurate an provides and  

Font onvisualsFont is large understanding. maximize audience Information is to organized beenough seen to byall. main points standout. Details that minimized are so Exemplary Iowa State University Department of Educational Department and University of Iowa PolicyStudies State Leadership applications included. are and Some helpful complete. concepts and are theories accurate For most the explanations part, of    qualitythe of presentation. the Communication to aidscontribute hearing the him/her. audiencethe occasionally has trouble slightly at uncomfortable and times, fast presenter slow. The seems or appropriate. too is Pacing sometimes Level presentation of is generally bemay confusing organized.well few minor A points Presentation generally is and clear Oral Presentation Rubric (8-24-00) Presentation Oral Some not material supported is Appropriate is information sizeFont isfor appropriate by visual aids. included. reading. Levels of Achievement of Levels Proficient Explanations of concepts and/or     prepared or inappropriately. used Communication poorly aidsare Aspects presentation too of are Listener can followpresentation with the presentation.the practice. little gain Listeners from attempt is tie theoryLittle made to to aretheories incomplete. inaccurate or is information the read. is of listener if veryMuch attentive. anduncomfortable only heard can be Presenteraudience. seems orsophisticatedelementary too for haphazard.Organization seems are clear. Someeffort. arguments not Listeners be may confused. Unimportant material is muchToo is information isFont to toobe small easily highlighted. included. seen. Marginal insights. theory. gain Listeners nonew referenceNo to is literature or made detract presentation. the from arethey so prepared poorly that they communicationNo or used, aidsare anxious and cannotheard. be audience. Presenteris obviously audience.the Information is to read elementary too sophisticated or for Presentation is too consistently Listeners confused. are Logic not arguments made of is clear. Unacceptable Bias (e.g.,Racism, Sexism, Agism, Use Language: of from Freedom Word Choice Use Language: of and Grammar Content: of Accuracy Content Language Responsiveness to Audience: Body Interaction Responsiveness to Audience: Verbal Personal Appearance Heterosexism, etc.) ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 22 Criteria appropriate forthe occasion the and Personal appearance is completely language are from free bias. Both languageand oral body precise meaning. easily. are for their Words chosen grammatical, and together flow they Sentences are and complete consistently accurate. theincluded in presentation is Information (names, facts, etc.) audience. and when ease interacting with Body languagereflects confidence needed. questions. when Summarizes clarifies, restates, and to responds comments and needs. Consistently Highly audience responsive to audience. Exemplary ISU ELPSISU Oral Presentation 2 Rubric Page interacting with audience. Body languagereflects when comfort for interaction. needed. someopportunities Misses to questions,summarizes and when time, clarifies,restates, and responds comments and the of needs. Most Generally audience responsive to occasion and audience. the appearance the appropriate is for For most the personal part, exceptions. free bias with from one two minor or Oral languageand bodylanguageare their meaning. precise exceptions, are words chosen for flow easily. few together With a complete grammatical, and they and For most the sentences part, are oversight. resultthe nervousness of or Listeners errors recognize any to be significantNo made. are errors Levels of Achievement of Levels Proficient Body languagereflects some Reluctantly interacts with audience. Personal appearance is somewhat Oral languageand/or bodylanguage inappropriate. vocabulary somewhat or is limited are incomplete/halting, and/or of Some evident. sentences slangare but somegrammaticaland errors use Listeners canpresentation, followthe errorsEnough made are toa distract audience. whendiscomfort interacting with questionsResponds inadequately. to audience. forinappropriate occasion the and mayListeners offended. be somesignificantbias. includes reliable. iscan information determine what usefulpresentation listener is the if accurate. is information The listener,knowledgeable but some Marginal to interact with audience. Body languagereveals reluctance a responsive to group. audience participation. not Is discouragesAvoids or active for occasion the and audience. Personal appearance is inappropriate offended. all, will listeners probably be frequently reflects bias.Some, not if Oral languageand/or bodylanguage presented. cannotthat they focus ideas onthe grammar and appropriate vocabulary presenter’s apparent with difficulty Listeners so are distracted bythe Listeners have may been misled. source of information. accurate depend presentation onthe as a inaccurate cannot listener that the Information is included sufficiently Unacceptable Written Communication:Written Tone Voice Purpose Organization Content Psychological Association (APA) Publication of Manual American the Use MostEdition of the Recent of Use References of communications: In for scholarly addition, Punctuation, Capitalization, Italics, etc.) Grammar, (i.e., Mechanics Spelling, Word Choice Sentence Structure ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 23 Criteria Expressing ideas clearly in writing. ideas in clearly Expressing from one to another. onefrom to structure. Theylength and smoothly flow Sentences phrased well are varied in and communication).scholarly researchapplication, report, summary, (e.g., letter,purpose memo, proposal, for audience the appropriate the and for tone consistentlyThe professional is and sustainsreader and throughout. interest writing isThe compelling. hooks It the theto reader. writer’s purposeThe is readily apparent reasoning. eachto other. can Reader followline of another and one clearlyfrom are to linked flow thesis.support the They smoothly ideas arrangedThe logically are to gainsinsights.Reader a topic. limited analysis of sufficiently andthesis displaysthoughtful, a in-depth aeffectively purpose central supports or balancedEven, clearly information and consistently. is accuratelyAPA used format and represented. clear attributionclaims and is and fairly toCompelling evidence given support is errors. writing or is freeThe free almost of consistentlyWord precise. choiceis Iowa State University Department of Educational Department and University of Iowa PolicyStudies State Leadership Exemplary Written Communication Rubric(7-8-00) Written violations. APA used format is with minor generally present. References to support claims are distraction or meaning. obscurethe writing, butrepresent don’t major they a There occasionalviolations the are in onefind precise effective. more and writer beyond goes generic the to word Word choiceis good.The generally sentence generally is smooth. structure. The from flow to sentence demonstrate somevariety in length and Sentences are phrasedand well and purpose. general, is audience the appropriate it for The is tone professional. generally In interesting. communication is focused generally and occasionally pedantic. The The generally writingbut is engaging, occasionally digress purpose. the from The but writinga may has purpose, firm part, reader canreasoning. follow line of clearly each Formost the linked to other. thesis.support the They usually are The are ideas arranged logically to Reader gainssomeinsights. analysis of sufficiently a topic. limited thesis displays and evidence a of basic Information for firm provides support Levels ofLevels Achievement Proficient knowledge of APAknowledge format. of reflects document Format of incomplete source the confused about ideas. the of unsubstantiated statements. The reader is the overreliesprovided, writer on occasionalAlthough references are distracted bythem.reader is writing has andThe errors, numerous the inappropriately. used are words limited. words of range is Some merelyWord adequate, the choiceis and occasional distractionfor reader. the theyconstructed, an and represent sentencesSome awkwardly are purpose. the appropriateor and for audience tone not The consistently is professional maintain interest.to readers it find interesting parts, difficult may paper the Though have some writing and isThe dull perfunctory. purpose alwaysThe is clear. not doso. motivated to intendswriter but not probably may be together. can Reader figure out what ideassenseFrequently, to fail make writing isThe not arranged logically. gains few insights. basic general.Analysis is or Reader supports thesis times.Information at Marginal as APA. documentFormat not of recognizable is claims. References to not are support cited is stops confused and reading. meaningthe the of reader passage. The Errors arenumerous obscure that they so also use and clichés colloquial language. confusing reader. The the writer may Many used are words inappropriately, to reader. the representenough a to distraction major Errors in sentence structurefrequent are purpose. inappropriate the and for audience The professional. is isIt tone not reading. audience quicklyand loses interest stops The personality. writinglittle has The The unclear. generally purpose is interest. identify a reasoning lineand of loses organization.logical reader cannot The The any writing lacks semblanceof misinformed. Reader confusedor be is may thesis. vague evident. or Analysis is not Paper not does successfully identify Unacceptable ELPS Doctoral Student background and that ofbackground and others; being skilledworking in effectively with individualsfrom diverse cultural backgrounds; exemplary listeningand skills. responding Interpersonal Communication:

  multicultural, by non-sexist society Revealing understanding a of    through openness inwith working others Creating climate a trust of and Sensitivity Shared Goals Organizational personal goals and Nature humankind of Assessment Page 22 displaying sensitivity individualsresponding to support, and feedback providing encouragement, self congruentbeing expressing in listening responding and Criteria backgrounds. individuals varied cultural from sensitivity inwith working Displays consistently utmost the as not stereotypes. people, Responds individuals consistently to constructive feedback. maximum highly support, and Provides hopeful encouragement, oneself. Maximally congruent in expressing skills whichfacilitative. highly are Uses responding activeand listening sensitivity to interpersonalnuances. Interacts others with deep highly cooperative manner. Works toward sharedgoalsin a assertion. Pursues goalswith high and energy humankind. optimistic view nature of the of Demonstrates a and positive Understanding issues and trendsmulticultural a in non-sexist society; demonstrating sensitive knowledge awareness own and cultural of Iowa State University DepartmentIowa University Educational State of Leadershipand Policy Studies Exemplary Interpersonal Communication Rubric (7-8-00) backgrounds. individuals varied cultural from sensitivity inwith working Displays rather consistently stereotypes. individuals people, as not Responds of most time the to and constructive feedback. Provides encouragement, support, inCongruent expressing oneself. skills which facilitative. are Uses responding activeand listening to interpersonalnuances. Interacts others with sensitivity cooperative manner. Works toward sharedgoalsin a assertively. Pursues goalsactively and rather of humankind. optimisticmostly view nature the of Demonstrates apositive and fairly Levels of Achievement Proficient backgrounds. individuals varied cultural from degree sensitivity inwith of working ofDisplays most time the some stereotypes. individuals people, as not Responds not morethan to often constructive feedback. support, andminimal minimally Provides someencouragement, oneself. Minimally congruent in expressing which minimally facilitative. are Uses responding and listening skills sensitivity to interpersonalnuances. Interacts others with some cooperativethan manner. Works toward less sharedgoalsin a with prompting others. from Pursues goalswith and low energy nature of humankind. somewhat the of optimistic view Demonstrates a and slightly positive Marginal backgrounds. individuals varied cultural from sensitivity inwith working Displays consistently lack a of Responds to people stereotypically. andsupportive, destructive feedback. Provides discouraging, non- oneself. Highly incongruent in expressing that are of destructive relationships. Fails listen responds and in to ways sensitivity to interpersonalnuances. Interacts others with no shared goals. Not cooperative intoward working Fails setgoals. to humankind. viewpessimistic the of nature of Demonstrates a negative and Unacceptable consistent withprofessional commitment. Intrapersonal Communication: Demonstration beliefs values of and Articulation beliefs values of and Personal Philosophy chosen discipline Practicing ethical the standards of of discipline chosen Knowledge about standards ethical Lifelong learning ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 22 Criteria Knowing one’sKnowing of philosophy life; being ofand aware beliefs one’s values; committing lifelong to learning; possessing ethicalstandards Provides abundant evidence of walks talk. the values congruent fashion, in a e.g., andLives beliefs expresses and articulately. Expresses beliefs values and confidence. life with articulately strong and Expresses of personal philosophy discipline. for ethical the standards chosen of Acts with and congruently advocates discipline. theabout standards of ethical chosen Possesses extraordinary knowledge lifelongcommitment to learning. Exemplary Iowa State University DepartmentIowa University Educational State of Leadershipand Policy Studies Intrapersonal Communication Rubric (7-8-00) standards chosen of discipline. Acts with ethical the congruently discipline. ethicalthe standards chosen of Possesses averageknowledge about lifelongcommitment to learning. Provides someevidence of values congruent rather in a fashion. andLives beliefs expresses and articulately. Expresses beliefs values and rather confidence. life articulately rather and with Expresses of personal philosophy Levels of Achievement Proficient relatively minor. chosen are discipline. violations Any Acts ethical the standards within of discipline. ethicalthe standards chosen of Possesses knowledge minimal about lifelongcommitment to learning. Provides scant of evidence values incongruent in fashion. a andLives beliefs expresses and articulation.little Expresses beliefs values and with life hesitation. and awkwardly with Expresses of personal philosophy Marginal profession. are Violations serious. Violates standards chosen ethical of discipline. theabout standards of ethical chosen Possesses to little noknowledge lifelongcommitment to learning. Provides noevidence a of fashion. values highly in a incongruent andLives beliefs expresses and inarticulately. Expresses beliefs values and philosophy life. of unableIs topersonal express a Unacceptable issues the in program fields of evaluationand educational assessment. theguiding improvement of educational programs.Understanding theoretical perspectives, evaluationand assessmentmodels, professional standards, historical and trends, current Evaluation/Assessment: ELPS Doctoral Student Approaches Theoretical Models and Understanding of own areaown evaluations/assessments in managing Initiating, designing, and Area Issues Own Emphasis in Evaluation/Assessment Understanding Current of Assessment Issues Evaluation/ in Understanding Current of Professional Standards Commitment to Understanding and of Assessment

Criteria Understanding concepts and skills demonstrating necessary delineating, for obtaining, and providing information assist to judging in and the worth approaches, and standards.approaches, and based oncurrentevaluation models, effectively managean design,and inappropriateappropriate/ can and whenKnows evaluation is professionalown area. assessment/evaluation within issues articulates currentClearly educational assessment. areasthe program evaluation of and articulates currentClearly issues in professional standards.for Advocatesprofessional standards. in accordconsistently with Evaluation/assessment practice is were bywhom they and developed. models. Explainsevaluation how approachesassessment and andDescribes of a compares variety Iowa State University Department ofEducational Leadership Policy and Studies Exemplary managing evaluations.managing designing, andgood skills in orappropriate Has inappropriate. determine is when evaluation countedCan usually be onto ownto professional field. assessment/evaluation related issues discuss current ableIs most to assessment.and thein area program evaluation of discuss current ableIs most to issues with standards.harmony Practice field. the generally is in and relationshiptostandards their knowledgeableIs professional about evaluation. modelsapproaches of and and variousKnows can discuss Evaluation/Assessment Rubric (7-8-00) Proficient Levels of AchievementLevels of design, and managean evaluation At times, experiencesdifficulty familiarIs own with someissues in familiarIs with someissues related Possesses somefamiliaritywith Can discuss theoreticalmodels and effectively. skills needed the some of to possess Does inappropriate. not is appropriate/ evaluation consistently identifywhencannot because outcarrying evaluations information. reliable asconsistently sourceof a isevaluation/assessment not but to related field areliable as information. sourceof not consistently butassessment is program evaluation andto to practice. guide standards enoughknowledgeable to use butprofessional is standards not approaches in superficialterms. Marginal evaluation. appropriate to designand or manage an needed determine evaluation to is when Does expertise not or haveinsight the field.own current issues evaluation/assessment in littleExhibits nounderstanding or of current and significance. their issues Has understanding little familiaritywith or of field. the thecommitment to professional standards Does an not understanding project or of models and approaches. Has understanding little theoretical of Unacceptable ELPS Doctoral Student Collecting Data of based worth ondata and/or making judgments Recommending decisions Findings andInterpreting Reporting Assessment Page 22 Criteria projections. effective decision-making future and evaluation/assessment into findings evidence.analysis of Incorporates recommendations based oncritical Develops insightful audience. for intended the appropriate concisely manner thatand inis a accurately,data cohesively, clearly, assessment andInterprets reports procedures. sophisticated data collectionusing professionalaccord standards with reliableCollects valid data and in Exemplary ISU ELPSISU Evaluation/Assessment 2 Rubric Page projections. andon data can suggest some Can develop recommendations based audiences.intended for to reportingconditions findings accurately.data Understands the assessment andInterprets reports professionalaccord standards. with reliableCollects valid data and in Proficient Levels of AchievementLevels of Understands importance the of Understands importance the of Possesses someunderstanding of with availablewith data. recommendations inuseful harmony cannot consistentlybut develop projectionsrecommendations and effectively. to useable knowledge this reports, not alwaysappropriate but is interpretationaccurate and practice. applyconsistently knowledge the in isprocedures not but able to collectiondata theory and Marginal recommendations based onavailable data. Has making difficulty judgments and/or appropriately. report evaluation/assessment findings scantExhibits interpret ability and to to collect valid data. reliable and littleExhibits nounderstanding how or of Unacceptable base aboutbase adults asto and learners how implement implications the within contexts work. of their orientations; articulating orientations the in that thought underliedemocratic systems government their of and relationships education; to understandingcomprehensive knowledge ofpersons all understanding ages; the historical, philosophical, social cultural and of contexts education for of persons alldeveloping ages; understanding of diverse philosophical Foundations:

Critique policy of educational foundations Identification patterns of in educationalAnalysis of premises Criteria ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 23 Developing understandingDeveloping education as a of institution; social utilizing diverse analytical interpretive and approaches appropriate the of for study education for supported extensive evidence. with developed,well persuasive,and affecting education in that are society Generates critiques policies of ideas. strong support and to defend evidence social education; of contexts provides history, sociology, and anthropology, Clearly the identifiespatterns in writing.and in clearly articulatesanalysisorally the fundamental educational premises; andsimilarities differences among Demonstrates analysis insightful of Iowa State University Department ofEducational Leadership Policy and Studies Exemplary adequate evidence. critiques with supported are affecting society; education and Generates goodcritiques policies of evidence to ideas. defend provides support and appropriate and of contexts social education; history, sociology, anthropology, Identifies patterns many in the writing and orally. analytical abilityevident is in fundamental educational premises; andsimilarities differences among Demonstrates goodanalysisof Levels of AchievementLevels of Foundations Rubric (7-8-00) Proficient critiques minimal. is society; evidence to support policies affecting education and Generates adequate critiques of support to ideas. defend provides and someevidence and of contexts social education; history, sociology, anthropology, Identifies the somepatterns in orally.writing or analytical abilityevident is in educational premises; some differences fundamental among Can identifysome and similarities Marginal supported evidence. with undeveloped, not persuasiveand not Generates policy critiques that are trends of to related context the education. student cannot articulateunderlying evidenceNo that patterns recognized; are not in orally. evident writing or educational premises; is analytical ability differences fundamental among Cannot or identifysimilarities Unacceptable Creation learning of communities Critical thinking with learning theory Connection of educational principles Professional ethics Criteria ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 22 engagement, self-analysis. and setting, activity planning, active learning involved in bybeing goal participants shareownership for Creates strong communities where as educational goal. an clearlyothers; critical values thinking development critical in of thinking demonstrates with facility written verbal presentations; and Clearly critical in evidences thinking practice in educational settings. personal theory learning of and learn; makes link clear between practice how and of premises people between evolution educational the of Clearly articulatesconnection the behavior is ethical all times. at related the to professional specialty; understanding ethical of principles Clearly comprehensive articulates a Exemplary analysis. active engagement self- and/or setting,goal activity planning, learning in areas many including: participants for to shareownership Creates opportunities for an educational goal. importance of thinking critical as thinking; understands the experiences critical that foster developability educational to presentations; the demonstrates inthinking written verbal and Generally critical evidences and educational practice in settings. can link of personal theory learning and of premises people how learn; evolution educational of practice connectionthe between the Articulates a of goodunderstanding evident. no violations ethicalare of practice principles to related specialty; the Articulates understanding ethical of ISU ELPSISU Foundations 2 Rubric Page Levels of AchievementLevels of Proficient engagement self-analysis. and/or activity planning, active two areas goal including: setting, involvement in learning or in one Allows participants some an educational goal. importance of thinking critical as minimally understands the that foster critical thinking; developed educational experiences student’s work; occasionally isthinking demonstrated in Minimal of evidence critical of to educational practice. learning occasionally links personal theory practice theory; and learning connection between educational Can sometimes articulatea tobrought student’s the attention. practice addressed are when ethics; of minor violations ethical understanding professional of Articulates only minimal Marginal with student works. which learning active involvement or in groups with groups; noevidence cooperative of Assumes an in working authoritarian role educational goal. importance of thinking an critical as critical not thinking;does articulatethe educational experiences that foster student’s work; develop cannot Evidence critical is in of thinking lacking practice. articulate between and link the theory personal practice education; of cannot evidenceNo that learning theory guides conform to ethical practice. professional ethics; behavior does not Cannot articulatean understanding of Unacceptable ELPS Doctoral Student Technology: Organizational ProcessesOrganizational TechnologyRole of in Technology Integration Practice: TechnologyRole of in Educational Technology Support Practice: TechnologyRole of in Educational Technology EducationalPractice: Emerging TechnologyRole of in Educational TechnologyRole of in Learning Assessment Page 23 Criteria Understanding theapplications, role, and limitations of(applied technology learning science)in organizational and processes. known in literature.known the technology using is what tool, is to required implement a administrative and support logistics Assesses to which extent the to enhance educational practice. technological systems services and literature. Assesses potential the of synthesizing the findings from emerging technology resources, limitations contemporary of and Analyzes and capabilities the topic. and/or conduct onthis research literature. Develops original theory synthesizing findings in the learners’ ways knowing, of and technologicalon particular tools Articulates effects the technology of information. communicating organizational resources forand managing identify useful tools technology and resources, and to servicesand technologyamong systems, literature to make informed choices Uses the findings relevant in findings in literature. the educational practice, synthesizing technology to enhance tools curricular needs in selecting Can distinguish between and market Iowa State University DepartmentIowa University Educational State of Leadershipand Policy Studies Exemplary practice. cannot fully knowledge apply in organizational but information, managing communicating and services that might useful be for technology resources, systems, and Can discuss literature the concerning applications. knowledgeapply to practical educational practice but cannot fully technology to enhance tools curricular needs in selecting difference market between and that which known is the about Can synthesize the from literature knowledge to practical applications. cannottools fully apply but implementing technology particular support requirementsof that which known is the about Can synthesize the from literature fully knowledge apply to practical. technology cannot resources but contemporary emerging and capabilities limitations and of that which known is the about Can synthesize the from literature theory conduct or originalresearch. yettools. to develop not able Is learning particular of technological knowing and for implications the technology of onlearners’ ways literature about effects the of Synthesizes findingsthe from Technology RubricTechnology (7-8-00) Levels of Achievement Proficient Is acquainted with acquainted Is sometechnology discuss abledifferenceIs the to superficialwith treatment. technologyparticular but often tools, implementingrequirements of discuss ablesupport Is the to discus abletheIs to and capabilities discuss ableeffectsIs the to of manner. their in superficial only a utility butinformation, to is assess able communicating organizational bemight for useful managing and systems, resources, servicesthat and often with superficialtreatment. enhance educational practice, but in selectingto tools technology between curricular market needs and often with superficialtreatment. emerging technology but resources, limitations contemporary of and treatment. oftentools, with but superficial learning particular of technology knowing and for implications the technology of onlearners’ ways Marginal organizational information. andmanaging communicating beservices that might for useful systems,technology resources, and exhibitsRarely an acquaintancewith educational practice. enhance tools technology to selectingcurricular needs in differencethe market between and exhibitsRarely an of understanding tools. particularimplementing technology support requirementsof exhibitsRarely an of understanding resources.technology andcontemporary emerging and ofcapabilities limitations exhibitsRarely an of understanding tools.technology for particularimplications earning of of ways the knowing and effectsthe technology of onlearners’ exhibitsRarely an of understanding Unacceptable ELPS Doctoral Student

Technology and SocialTechnology Justice and Technology:Justice and Technology Technology:Justice and to Access TechnologyEthics and Social Change: Integration Between Technology and ChangesCurrent in Technology Social Change: Integration Between Technology and Widespread of Use Technology Social Change: Integration Between Technology and Assessment Page 24 Criteria information ininformation literature. the justice, basinganalysison social plays inhindering furthering or technologyCan analyze role the literature. in information resources, the using learner accessunequal to technology of implications andthe equal canUnderstands theorize and about principles.ethical regardeducation and to with legal of useinstances technology in Analyzes technology. information ethicallyacts when using and information use the regarding technology of and organizational and behaviors legalKnows ethical and personal society.organizations and information on in technologies theanalyze changes effectcurrent of literature the findings Uses from to theusing a literature as basis. as society organizations whole, and a and ontechnologyuse reliance in effectsAnalyzes the widespread of Exemplary ISU ELPSISU Technology Rubric Page 2 information ininformation practical applications. social cannot fully justice use but plays inhindering furthering or literature about technology role the Can synthesize in information the resources.to technology of and access equal unequal learner literature regarding implications the Can synthesize in information the real-life is situations limited. toAbility use analyze knowledge to technology.using and information andinformation ethically acts when usethe technology of and organizational regarding behaviors Knows and personal legal and ethical organizations and society. effect thosechanges have on technologiesinformation the and literature about in changes current Can synthesize the findings in knowledge in practice. literaturethe cannot fully utilize but society whole, a described as in organizationstechnology and in widespread and use reliance on ableIs to effects articulatethe of Levels of Achievement Proficient Articulates cursory knowledge a of Articulates cursory knowledge a of Articulates cursory knowledge a of effectsCannot the describe that cursoryDemonstrates knowledge a furthering or justice. social hindering rolethe technology playsin resources. unequal learner technology access to implicationsthe equal of and limitations in knowledge. ethicalviolate principles of because Mayinformation. unwittingly usethe technology of and organizational regarding behaviors legal ethical and personal and a superficialmanner. organizations and except in society, technology have changes on organizations and society. reliance ontechnology in of effects the widespread of and used Marginal social justice implications.social technologyViews neutral, as with no resources.technology andequal unequal learner to access addressesNever of implications the ethicalviolate in principles practice. and technology May information. usebehaviors the regarding of organizational personal and legalknowledge ethical of and not or exhibitDoes understanding society. havechanges onorganizations and andtechnologies effect the those in changes information current not demonstrateDoes knowledge of a as society whole. onorganizationstechnology and usewidespread reliance and on theCannot of analyze effects Unacceptable ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 25 The Capstone Experience for Doctoral Students in ELPS

When coursework is substantially completed, students participate in a Capstone Experience in which they use their knowledge, skills, and abilities in a specific problem-based situation in a public or private sector organization. The purpose of the capstone is twofold: 1) to engage students in doing educational leadership and 2) to collaboratively support educational organizations with assistance in addressing a need.

The experience can be completed individually or in a team of students working in the same organizational setting. The length of time is variable, depending on the nature of the experience. The student works within the framework of the organization, assists in carrying out its mission, and engages in reflective and scholarly endeavors suitable to advanced graduate studies.

In completing this requirement, the student: • works with the chair of the POS committee or an approved mentor to identify an experience in a public or private, profit or non-profit organization. • develops a Capstone proposal and presents it to the POS committee for review and approval. • completes the experience. • prepares a report for both the organization and the POS committee. • is examined over the Capstone experience at the time of the preliminary orals.

The Capstone Experience, in conjunction with the learning portfolio, fulfills the requirement for the preliminary written examination. Departmental guidelines for the preliminary examination require students to demonstrate competency in the following areas:

1. A working knowledge of the field, including its research, its prominent individuals and their contributions, and its issues and trends. 2. An ability to synthesize knowledge and demonstrate skills associated with the field in the six program domains: leadership, research, communication, assessment and evaluation, educational foundations and technology utilization. 3. An ability to write stylistically and intellectually at a level of sophistication commensurate with the dissertation. 4. An ability to function effectively in face-to-face dialogue. 5. An ability to create viable solutions to problems in the field.

Expected Capstone Outcomes

The expected Capstone outcomes include: 1. a report submitted to the client and 2. other outcomes, as determined by the POS committee, that relate to the six program domains. (These outcomes should be commensurate with the criteria for quality and depth. They should enable the candidate to synthesize what was learned.) Organizational Placement for the Capstone Experience ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 26

The primary responsibility for the organizational placement for the Capstone Experience rests with the student and the POS chair. The student should be identifying potential organizational sites as he/she initiates the entire Capstone Experience.

If more than one ELPS doctoral student is to be working with the same organization, each student must have a line of inquiry (not necessarily the problem itself) and scholarly, analytical work that is independent from and clearly identifiable as separate and distinct from other students.

Supervision of the Capstone Experience

The primary Capstone Mentor may be the POS chair or suitable designee as determined by the POS chair and POS committee. A site supervisor who occupies a position in the host organization where the capstone experience occurs should also be identified. The site supervisor is encouraged to be involved in the Capstone orals either in person or via speakerphone.

Capstone Proposal

Each ELPS doctoral student is expected to develop a Capstone Proposal that includes:

1. Names, postal addresses, telephone and FAX numbers, and e-mail addresses (student and clients) 2. Name and responsibility of a person inside the organization with whom the student is working 3. A preliminary letter from an appropriate person in the host organization indicating that he/ she is a willing participant in the experience 4. Approval signature of POS Chair 5. Overview of the project: a. Title b. Background of the problem c. Literature review (brief) d. The delineation of a clear line of inquiry supported by the preliminary literature review e. Statement of the problem including delimitations f. Objectives/methods of the study g. Timeline h. Budget i. Budgetary or logistical problems which may be part of or contribute to/detract from the proposed work (extenuating circumstances) j. Means of reporting results (i.e., report, presentation, product)

k. Summary of deliverables to be completed by the end of the experience and presented to the POS committee for discussion at the preliminary orals l. Definition of terms m. Human Subjects Approval (if appropriate) n. Bibliography

The POS chair and committee must approve of the capstone proposal and sign-off that it meets their expectations. No student may initiate his/her capstone experience without an accepted capstone proposal approved by his or her POS chair and committee. ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 27

The Capstone Report(s)

The final report should include the following:

1. Title page 2. Table of contents 3. Executive summary 4. Introduction to problem (background and brief literature review) 5. Methodology 6. The solution (maybe an invention, document, product) 7. Definition of terms 8. Bibliography 9. Appendix (include Human Subjects Approval form)

Note:The student is expected to maintain a portfolio which documents all procedures, meetings, draft reports, and unexpected difficulties to overcome.

Preliminary Orals

The meeting to satisfy the requirement of the preliminary oral examination will be scheduled when the project is completed. In addition to the POS committee, a representative from the capstone placement site is encouraged to attend either in person or via speakerphone. A student will bring his/her learning portfolio to the meeting. The student will present his/her capstone project and describe how the experience related to the six program component areas. The portfolio will be circulated to the committee and used as a basis for additional discussion. ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 28 Aligning Assessments with Intended Learning Outcomes

In aligning the ELPS doctoral assessments with the intended learning outcomes, faculty were asked to complete a version of the matrix on the following page in which the cells were blank. The form (p. 29) requests that respondents determined whether each learning outcome is measured directly or indirectly on each assessment.

Once faculty completed the forms, the responses were tallied, and the summary of responses was discussed at a regular faculty meeting. Through discussion, faculty came to consensus about whether each assessment measures each outcome directly (2) or indirectly (1). The numbers in the cells of the matrix represent the consensus opinions. When discussing the Educational Foundations and Technology Utilization outcomes, the faculty did not reach consensus about all the assessments. More discussion will take place at future faculty meetings. ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 29 Aligning Assessments with Intended Learner Outcomes Educational Leadership and Policy Studies Iowa State University, January 2003

Assessments

Intended Portfolio Capstone Dissertation Dissertation Focus Groups Alumni Project Proposal Survey Learner Outcomes Leadership 1 & 2 2 1 1 1 1

Research 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1

Written 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1 Communication

Oral 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1 Communication

Intrapersonal 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1 Communication

Interpersonal 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1 Communication

Assessment and 1 & 2 2 2 2 1 1 Evaluation

Educational 1 & 2 ? ? ? 1 1 Foundations

Technology 1 & 2 ? ? ? 1 1 Utilization

To what extent should the assessment provide an opportunity to evaluate students’ achievement of the learner outcomes? 2 = Provides an opportunity for a direct and thorough assessment of outcomes in this area 1 = Provides an opportunity to assess outcomes in this area, but the assessment may be indirect (i.e., based on perceptions rather than direct evidence) 0 = Does not provide an opportunity to assess outcomes in this area ELPS Doctoral Student Assessment Page 30 Department-Level Assessment in ELPS

Focus Group Assessment of ELPS Doctoral Students The ELPS faculty periodically contract with the Iowa State University Research Institute for Studies in Education (RISE) to conduct focus groups with the doctoral students in the department. Students respond to questions about how their experiences in the program either help or interfere with their learning. Faculty discuss the summaries of results prepared by RISE, and they identify and implement changes in the program in order to improve student learning.

Review of Portfolios Each year in spring or summer, the faculty will examine the portfolios completed that year. Faculty will be organized into teams by learning outcome area (e.g., leadership, communication, etc.). Each team will review the portfolios for insights regarding learning in their outcome area and report back to the faculty at the August retreat.

Review of Capstone Reports Each year in spring or summer, the Assessment Committee will review the capstone reports completed that year for evidence of learning in relevant learning outcome areas. They will report back to the faculty at the August retreat.

Review of Dissertations

Each year in spring or summer, the Assessment Committee will review the dissertations completed that year regarding learning in the areas of research and communication. They will report back to the faculty at the August retreat.

Alumni Surveys The Research Institute for Studies in Education (RISE) surveys ELPS alumni every five to seven years regarding overall satisfaction and adequacy of preparation. In addition, Education Career Services annually collects data from ELPS alumni using the “Employment Update/Career Services Evaluative Survey.” Data gathered with this instrument are analyzed and reviewed by the faculty.