Program: Educational Admin (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 - 3:00:11 pm
1) Below are your program student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
Program Standards/Outcomes
What candidates should know and do, and the ways that they should demonstrate professionalism
1. Educational leaders are knowledgeable about and understand organizational life in schools and the dynamics of school change processes by examining trends, traditions, theory and policies of institutions in order to improve educational practice which promotes the learning success of all students.
2. Educational leaders understand, can articulate, and act within the moral/ethical, political, collaborative, strategic and caring dimensions of administrative roles within diverse cultural contexts.
3. Educational leaders demonstrate a well developed analytic capacity that is informed by theory, research, and practice to solve organizational problems and generate policy.
4. Educational leaders can apply knowledge and skills to changing organization contexts impacted by social, political, economic, cultural, and technological forces in order to foster the growth and development of the organization and its members.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: Student Handbook. URL, if available online: 
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: NA UHM Catalog. Page Number: Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: NA Other: College of Education NCATE website Other: 3) Below is the link(s) to your program's curriculum map(s). If we do not have your curriculum map, please upload it as a PDF.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.
0% 1-50% 51-80% 81-99%
100%5) For the period June 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
Assessment 1
Educatopmal Leadership Platform
1. This assigment in EDEA 601 (Introduction to School Leadership) asks students to write their own educational leadership platforms, capturing their values and beliefs about education, schools, and school systems. As an assessment, it represents a preliminary evaluation of students' understanding of school leadership as, it completed early in their Master's program. It serves as a baseline for students and can be used to consider how they develop a broader and more comprehensive understanding of the teaching and learning components in schools. Targets SLO's 1,2.
Assessment 2
Research and School Improvement Inquiry
Ase EDEA 602 (Research methods in educational administration) is designed for prospective administrators to consider educational problems, using quantitative and qualitative approaches, this assessment determines whether or not students are able to do so. Students must identify and educational problem, conduct an appropriate literature review, and propose an empirical study to address the problem. Students should be knowledgable of various research methods and be able to apply an appropriate one to their line of inquiry. Targets SLO 3
Assessment 3
Case Study in Education Law and Leadership.
EDEA 630 (Education Law) focuses on providing prospective school administrators with a comprehensive understanding of the Constitutional and statutory law, court decisions, and policies that govern the United States public school systems.The course content is contextualized within a framework of prudence and decision-making processes administrators should exercise with respect to the law. Students must identify legal issues relevant to the case, cite and discuss all relevant existing law, present a plan for resolving he situation, and present an analysis of how the situation could have been avoided. Targets SLOs 2,3,4
Assessment 4
Leadership/Organization Culminating Project (Professional Practice Portfolio)
This final assignment in EDEA 699 asks students to design, develop and execute an independent study related to their interest, work and study in educational leadership. For example, students may chose to explore a topic in greater depth through an extensive review of research. Or they may conduct an empirical study on a problem in their school organization. As a result of doing this project, students should demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of school leadership and organizations. Targets SLOs 1,2,3,4
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #5.
Assessment 1: Students prepared a written leadership platform document.
Assessment 2: The students completed a written paper identifying an educational problem, conducting an appropriate literature review on the problem, and proposing an empirical (either quantitative or qualitative) study to address that concern.
Assessment 3: Students wrote a response to a legal case. This assignment consisted of a comprehensive case involving a legal issue that a principal might encounter. The assessment was based on their ability to address four aspects. First, they identified the legal (and often accompanying ethical) issue that is central to the case. Second, they cited and discussed all relevant aspects of law (e.g., case law, legislation, policy). Third, they presented a plan for handling the situation that addressed the legal aspects and leads to the best possible resolution for all parties involved. Fourth, they presented an analysis of how, if possible, the situation could have been avoided and the action they would take to prevent a recurrence.
Assessment 4.1: Students designed, developed and executed a professional portfolio related to their interest, work and study in educational leadership.
7) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Assessment 1: 33 students submitted evidence.
Assessment 2: 28 students submitted evidence
Assessment 3: 49 students submitted evidence
Assessment 4: 14 students submitted evidence
8) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Course instructor(s) Faculty committee Ad hoc faculty group Department chairperson Persons or organization outside the university Faculty advisor Advisors (in student support services) Students (graduate or undergraduate) Dean/Director Other: 9) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
Used a rubric or scoring guide Scored exams/tests/quizzes Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used) Compiled survey results Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam) Other: 10) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #5:
Summarize the actual results.
Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000195 EndHTML:0000033255 StartFragment:0000002383 EndFragment:0000033219 SourceURL:file://localhost/Users/coestaff/Desktop/Assessment%20report%20EDEA%20Manoa.doc
Assessment 1
Title: Educational Platform
Fall 2009/Spring 2010
N= 33 of 33
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Educational Content 0% 100% 0%
Leadership 0% 89% 11%
Effective Argument 0% 94 % 6%
Writing Effectiveness 0% 89% 11%
Audience 0% 89% 11%
Assessment 2 Research and School Improvement Inquiry
Title: Proposing an Educational Research Study
Fall 2009/Spring 2010
N = 28 of 28
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Problem identification 0% 80% 20%
Framework/literature 0% 80% 20%
Research methods/analysis 0% 76% 14%
Implications 0% 84% 16%
Assessment 3 Case Study in Law and Leadership
Fall 2009/Spring 2010
N=49 of 49
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Identification of legal issue 0% 90% 10%
Citing of relevant law 0% 80% 20%
Resolution plan 0% 80% 20%
Analysis and implications 0% 95% 5%
Assessment 4 Leadership/Organization Culminating Project (Portfolio)
Fall 2009/Spring 2010
N=14 of 14
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Demonstration of knowledge about
and understanding of:
#1 Organizations 0% 86% 14%
#2 Administrative roles 0% 86% 14%
#3 Changing organizational 0% 86% 14%
contexts
11) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
The faculty met twice during the 2010-2011 year to review and discuss the results of the assessments. In addition, they were submitted to the College of Education Student Information System as part of the semi-annual report for the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). The results were also shared with the Hawaii Department of Education Professional Development and Research Institute, with whom the Dept. of Ed Admin has a longstanding and close relationship in principal preparation. Overall, we feel that our goals are consistent with national standards for principal preparation and are on target for what principals in Hawaii and the rest of the country need to know as they begin their profession. We are satisfied with student outcomes, especially the fact that none of the students were rated "unacceptable" on any measure. We would like to see this continue, and to see more student outcomes in the "exceeds" category.
We discussed our rubrics for what constitutes "unacceptable, satisfactory, and exceeds" in each assessment to better ensure inter-rater reliability and consistency for students, regardless of who teaches the courses where the assessments are conducted. We also examined our file in which we collect cross-sectional data from year to year on groups of students to see if any areas emerge as problems and to track progress of groups over time. We looked at individual student progress longitudinally, particularly with respect to how their coursework relateed to their culminating project/paper (Assessment 4).
12) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries?
This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.
In the past, the majority of the students in our program came to campus and matriculated in a traditional face to face learning setting. This is rapidly changing, and more of our courses are now delivered via online or in a hybrid delivery system (face to face and online). We have been watching this closely to see what effect it has on student performance on the SLOs, and whether or not we might need to modify the SLOs for a learning environment that is much more electronically based. It does seem to have an effect on student satisfaction (students love the convenience, but miss the personal interaction), however it doesn't seem to affect student performance on the outcomes.