SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
Spacer
Assessment : 2011 - 2012 : Educational Programs :
Educational Leadership EDD
Educational Leadership EDD
2 Goals 2 Objectives 3 Indicators 3 Criteria 3 Findings 3 Actions
| GOAL: Competence In Field Of Educational Leadership |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Doctoral students in Educational Leadership will develop knowledge, skills, and success in educational leadership fields |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Doctoral students in educational leadership will develop a proposal for dissertation research. The rubric assessing the proposal quality will include the first three chapters including introduction, literature review, and methodology. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| At least 80% of currently enrolled doctoral students will present a proposal with a defense decision of "accept with no changes" or "accept with changes." |
| Finding |
|
|||
| During the 2011 academic year, 13 Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership students successfully defended dissertation proposals. Of the cohort who most recently completed the proposal course (May 2012) and became eligible to propose, 9 of 13 students have already successfully proposed and are currently on track to graduate. This reflects an almost 70% proposal rate, which exceeds the average rate among other programs. While it is typical of other programs, we still did not meet our 80% criterion. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Students will successfully complete comprehensive exams at the end of core coursework. Written comprehensive examinations are developed by faculty and are administered in two parts: (a) a take home exam, completed over a one month time period, that focuses on application of research methods and statistics; and (b) an all day written examination completed on campus that focuses on the application of theory and synthesis of learning. Examinations are scored holistically as pass or fail and are scored by six faculty members. After successfully passing all six questions, students must participate in an oral comprehensive examination with three of their dissertation committee members. During the oral examinations, students must demonstrate their fulfillment and mastery of the doctoral program objectives and competencies. Forms used to document student completion of these examinations are included. Patterns across students' passing or failing responses are analyzed to indicate strengths and/or areas of need within the doctoral coursework and program. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
Last year 72.2% (13 of 18) passed all sections on the initial attempt. We hope to have at least 75% pass all sections on the initial attempt in 2011-2012. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
During the 2011 academic year, 100% (14 of 14) of doctoral students taking comprehensive exams passed all parts on the initial attempt. Review data from 2010 indicated that program curriculum changes implemented when the doctoral program went to 60 semester credit hours had not been adequately reflected in the comprehensive exams. Specifically, content added when the curriculum was integrated into the comprehensive exam. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
| To reach 80% (10.4/13), we need to survey students to determine what would be helpful. Sometimes it is difficult putting committees together. Other times it is time management since many of our students have full-time jobs in addition to the doctoral program. |
| Action |
|
|||
| A committee has reviewed the comprehensive examination format. Changes will be implemented during the upcoming academic year to increase the relevancy of the exams to student needs and program expectations. |
| GOAL: Quality And Effectiveness |
| Objective |
|
||||
| During the doctoral program, all students will develop the skills needed to submit one article for publication and one paper for presentation at a research conference, both to be externally reviewed. (Papers may be submitted for publication or presentation in cooperation with doctoral faculty.) Assessment of students' knowledge will be based upon acceptance of the paper by the journal or conference. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
|
Feedback from journal editors and/or conference planners related to the quality of article and proposal submissions |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
Positive feedback leading to the acceptance of a journal article or conference proposal. At least 50% of doctoral students will either publish an article or present at a conference. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
During the 2011 academic year, the Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership students demonstrated stellar accomplishments in academic presentations and peer-reviewed publications. Specifically, current educational leadership doctoral students participated in 41 national, international, and regional conference presentations and authored or co-authored 34 peer-reviewed publications as documented by the faculty. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
| Students are expected to make at least one presentation and submit one manuscript for publication as part of their doctoral program requirements. Faculty provide mentoring and support for these supervised scholarship activities through mechanisms including but not limited to co-authoring of proposals or projects and providing written and verbal feedback for student proposals and papers. We will raise our criterion from 50% to 60% next year. Financial support in the form of department travel scholarships will also be increased to the extent possible. |
| Closing the Loop |
|
A committee reviewed the comprehensive examination format. Changes will be implemented during the upcoming academic year to increase the relevancy of the exams to student needs and program expectations. Although we were at almost a 70% proposal rate, which exceeds the average rate among other programs, we are still striving for the 80%. We will try to mentor students more carefully to determine their committees and to manage their time so the proposal can be completed. Students are expected to make at least one presentation and submit one manuscript for publication as part of their doctoral program requirements. We were ecstatic about the scholarly production this year and plan to raise the criterion to 60% for next year. Faculty will provide mentoring and support for these supervised scholarship activities. Financial support in the form of department travel scholarships will also be increased to the extent possible. The rate of proposal defenses among students enrolled in EDLD 8033 meets program expectations; efforts will be made to sustain this trend.
|