Program: Educational Admin (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Wed Oct 09, 2013 - 3:32:32 pm
1) Below are your program's 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: 204-205 Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: NA Other: College of Education NCATE website Other: 3) Select one option:
- 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) Did your program engage in any program assessment activities between June 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013? (e.g., establishing/revising outcomes, aligning the curriculum to outcomes, collecting evidence, interpreting evidence, using results, revising the assessment plan, creating surveys or tests, etc.)
Yes No (skip to question 14)6) For the period June 1, 2012 to September 30, 2013: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
Assessment 1
Educational 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
7) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #6.
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.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Assessment 1: 26 students submitted evidence.
Assessment 2: 29 students submitted evidence
Assessment 3: 24 students submitted evidence
Assessment 4: 16 students submitted evidence
9) 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: 10) 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: 11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
Assessment 1
Title: Educational Platform
Fall 2012/Spring 2013
N= 26 of 26
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Educational Content 0% 25% 75%
Leadership 0% 25% 75%
Effective Argument 0% 20 % 80%
Writing Effectiveness 0% 10% 90%
Audience 0% 10% 90%
Assessment 2 Research and School Improvement Inquiry
Title: Proposing an Educational Research Study
Fall 2012/Spring 2013
N = 29 of 29
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Problem identification 0% 17% 83%
Framework/literature 0% 25% 75%
Research methods/analysis 0% 14% 76%
Implications 0% 17% 83%
Assessment 3 Case Study in Law and Leadership
Fall 2012/Spring 2013
N=24 of 24
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Identification of legal issue 0% 25% 75%
Citing of relevant law 0% 38% 62%
Resolution plan 0% 30% 70%
Analysis and implications 0% 25% 75%
Assessment 4 Leadership/Organization Culminating Project (Portfolio)
Fall 2012/Spring 2013
N=16 of 16
Unacceptable Acceptable Exceeds
Demonstration of knowledge about
and understanding of:
#1 Organizations 0% 25% 75%
#2 Administrative roles 0% 25% 75%
#3 Changing organizational 0% 19% 81%
contexts
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
After last year's assessment, the program faculty looked at what criteria in evaluating students constituted "acceptable" versus "exceeds". We use a system in the College of Education for tracking student progress for our accreditation called the Student Information System (SIS). We discovered that our Manoa Assessment report assessments reported far more "acceptable" than "exceeds" expectations, but our SIS data contradicted this. The faculty met several times to discuss what "acceptable" and "exceeds" really are, and concluded that based on student evidence, we were under-reporting how well the students actually are doing, based on their performance on the assessment. We developed new rubrics that are being applied to the assessments. This process is on-going, and we are still working on refining it.
13) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries?
This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.
Yes, since our program is an academic one that prepares professionals in schools, and since the professional expectations on the job are changing rapidly in this field, the program plans to reexamine course content this year to better align the curriculum with what is currently needed for and expected of school leaders.
14) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
Or, if the program did engage in assessment activities, please add any other important information here.
See response to #12.