CAS Standard 3: 4: 5: Ethics 6: Legal Resp. 7: Access 8: 9: Org. & Mgt. 10. Rel. 12. HIED 8301: Primary Doc. Analysis X X X X X X X C o r e HIED 8303: Leadership Theory Paper X X X HIED 8399: Diss. Seminar 1st Two Chapters X X X X K e y C o Administration HIED 8342: Policy Paper X X X X X X X X A s s n c e n t Student Affairs HIED 8350: Research Assignment X X e s s r a t i TYC Leadership HIED 8320: Team Res. Project X X X X X X m e n t o n Faculty Leadership HIED 8330: Research Assignment X X s C o m Comprehensive Exam: Research Section X X X X p s Comprehensive Exam: Higher Ed Sections X X X X X X X X X C a p s Dissertation Proposal X X X X e Dissertation X X X X and (Appendix 8.b.) for the grading rubric and cumulative summary of performance for the past three offerings of the course. Further elaboration on the course is provided below in the explanation of the dissertation process. Higher Education Doctoral Concentration Course Assessments: Each student is required to
Appendix 7.b. HIED 8345 Leadership Theories Interview Paper Summer 2013 Grading Rubric Summary 5- Outstanding 4- Very good 3- Acceptable 2- Below expectations 1. Scholarly and well organized paper Paper was extremely well organized and it effectively conveyed the interview research 5 Paper was clearly organized but needs improvement 2 Papers organization was only marginally acceptable 0 Paper organization was vague and it lacked clarity 0 2. Leadership Retrospective Paper demonstrated outstanding use of antecedents, specific roles, and extent of participation; and key elements in the leaders successes and failures were highlighted effectively 5 Paper did represent “leadership retrospective” but needs improvement 2 Paper only marginally presented “leadership retrospective” topic 0 “Leadership retrospective” topic is poorly developed and lacks specificity 0 3. Peer and work relationship Outstanding presentation of interactions and communication with work associates; nature of support; and quality of working relationships 4 Paper did present “ peer and work relationships” topic but needs improvement 3 Paper only marginally presented “peer and work relationships” topic 0 “Peer and work relationships” topic is poorly developed and lacks specificity 0 4. Personal and professional development Outstanding description applied to benefits/satisfactions of leadership experiences; outstanding description of the intersection between personal and professional life; outstanding highlights of social life, spiritual and/or religious involvement 5 Paper did present “personal and professional development” topic but needs improvement 2 Paper only marginally presented “personal and professional development” topic 0 “Personal and professional development” topic is poorly developed and lacks specificity 0
5- Outstanding 4- Very good 3- Acceptable 2- Below expectations 5. Summary and themes Outstanding identification of leadership theories studied and how leadership theory was utilized by the leaders interviewed 6 Good identification of leadership theories studied and how leadership theory was utilized by the leaders interviewed but could be stronger 1 Marginally acceptable identification of leadership theories studied and how leadership theory was utilized by the leaders interviewed but definitely needs improvement 0 Identification of leadership theories lacked depth and specificity and/or description of how leadership theory was utilized by the leaders interviewed lacked development 0 Comments:
Appendix 8.b. Spring and Fall 2013 HIED 8399: Dissertation Seminar Dissertation Proposal Chapters 1&2 Evaluation Rubric Summary (N=9) CATEGORY-WEIGHT Satisfactory Low Pass Fail Paper Content (75%) Ch1: Broad national discussion (5%) Thorough overview of topic from broad to specific 6 Insufficient overview of topic 3 Unrelated overview 0 Ch1: Specific national discussion (5%) Accurate specific discussion 7 Inaccurate specific discussion 2 Unrelated specific discussion 0 Ch1: Data to support topic (5%) Data effectively frames topic 5 Data ineffectively frames topic 3 No data 1 Ch 1: Statement of educational problem (10%) Thorough statement 6 Insufficient statement 2 No statement 1 Ch2: Critical review of previous literature (40%) Consistent critical review 4 Inconsistent critical review 5 Rote description 0 Ch2: Graphic of previous research Graphic presented effectively 7 Graphic presented ineffectively 1 No graphic included 1 Ch2: Gap in knowledge identified (5%) Gap clearly identified 7 Gap not clearly identified 1 Gap not identified 1 Research questions (RQs) (5%) Research questions are accurate 5 Research questions are inaccurate 3 No research questions 1 Conceptual framework (CF) (5%) CF accurately depicts study 4 CF inaccurately depicts study 4 CF not included 1 Conceptual flow Content flows logically between Ch1, Ch2, RQs, and CF 6 Inconsistent flow between Ch1, Ch2, RQs, and CF 3 2 Poor flow between Ch1, Ch2, RQs, and CF 1
Governance and Policy in Higher Education Page 3 Policy Brief Paper Rubric Assignment Criteria 4 = A 3 = B 2 = C 1 = D The policy brief that is well written employing common conventions of English; is readable, understandable, and scholarly in tone; employs APA Publication Manual (6th Ed.) referencing style with appropriate citations throughout; and, includes a set of high quality references from an appropriate array of sources. (10% of grade) Excellent policy brief employing common conventions of English; that is well written, readable, and scholarly; employs APA (6th Ed.) referencing style with appropriate citations throughout; and, includes a set of high quality references from an appropriate array of sources 6 Adequate policy brief employing common conventions of English; that is well written, readable, understand-able, and scholarly; employs APA (6th Ed.) referencing style with appropriate citations throughout; and, includes a set of high quality references from an appropriate array of sources 2 Marginal policy brief employing common conventions of English; that is well written, readable, and scholarly; employs APA (6th Ed.) referencing style with appropriate citations throughout; and, includes a set of high quality references from an appropriate array of sources 0 Inadequate policy brief employing common conventions of English; that is well written, readable, and scholarly; employs APA (6th Ed.) referencing style with appropriate citations throughout; and, includes a set of high quality references from an appropriate array of sources 0
Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice Cohesiveness (10%) Ties together information from all sources. Paper flows from one issue to the next without the need for headings. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. 1 For the most part, ties together information from all sources. Paper flows with only some disjointedness. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. 2 Sometimes ties together information from all sources. Paper does not flow – disjointedness is apparent. Author’s writing does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. 0 Does not tie together information. Paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Headings are necessary to link concepts. Writing does not demonstrate understanding any relationships. 0 Spelling & Grammar (10%) No spelling and/or grammar mistakes. 1 Minimal spelling and/or grammar mistakes. 1 Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes. 1 Unacceptable number of spelling and/or grammar mistakes. 0 Sources (10%) More than five current sources, of which at least three are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. Sources include both general background sources and specialized sources. sources and popular literature are acknowledged as such if they are cited. All web sites utilized are authoritative. 2 Five current sources, of which at least two are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are authoritative. 1 Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are credible. 0 Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are journal articles or scholarly books. Not all web sites utilized are credible, and/or sources are not current. 0 Citations (10%) Cites all data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. 2 Cites most data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. 1 Cites some data obtained from other sources. Citation style is either inconsistent or incorrect. 0 Does not cite sources. 0 Adapted from: Whalen, S. “Rubric from Contemporary Health Issues Research Paper” http://academics .adelphi.edu/edu/hpe/healthstudies/whalen/HED601_r2.shtml
Student A American College Student (HIED 8350) Research Paper Rubric, Fall 2013 Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice Integration of Knowledge (40%) The paper demonstrates that the author fully understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Concepts are integrated into the writer’s own insights. The writer provides concluding remarks that show analysis and synthesis of ideas. The paper demonstrates that the author, for the most part, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Some of the conclusions, however, are not supported in the body of the paper. 1 The paper demonstrates that the author, to a certain extent, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. The paper does not demonstrate that the author has fully understood and applied concepts learned in the course. Topic Focus (10%) The topic is focused narrowly enough for the scope of this assignment. A thesis statement provides direction for the paper, either by statement or a position or hypothesis. 1 The topic is focused but lacks direction. The paper is about a specific topic but the writer has not established a position. The topic is too broad for the scope of this assignment. The topic is not clearly defined. Depth of Discussion (10%) In-depth discussion & elaboration in all sections of the paper. 1 In-depth discussion & elaboration in most sections of the paper. The writer has omitted pertinent content or content runs-on excessively. Quotations from others outweigh the writer’s own ideas excessively. Cursory discussion in all sections of the paper or brief discussion in only a few sections.
Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice Cohesiveness (10%) Ties together information from all sources. Paper flows from one issue to the next without the need for headings. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. For the most part, ties together information from all sources. Paper flows with only some disjointedness. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. 1 Sometimes ties together information from all sources. Paper does not flow – disjointedness is apparent. Author’s writing does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. Does not tie together information. Paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Headings are necessary to link concepts. Writing does not demonstrate understanding any relationships. Spelling & Grammar (10%) No spelling and/or grammar mistakes Minimal spelling and/or grammar mistakes. 1 Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes. Unacceptable number of spelling and/or grammar mistakes. Sources (10%) More than five current sources, of which at least three are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. Sources include both general background sources and specialized sources. sources and popular literature are acknowledged as such if they are cited. All web sites utilized are authoritative. 1 Five current sources, of which at least two are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are authoritative. Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are credible. Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are journal articles or scholarly books. Not all web sites utilized are credible, and/or sources are not current. Citations (10%) Cites all data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. 1 Cites most data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. Cites some data obtained from other sources. Citation style is either inconsistent or incorrect. Does not cite sources.
Student B American College Student (HIED 8350) Research Paper Rubric, Fall 2013 Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice Integration of Knowledge (40%) The paper demonstrates that the author fully understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Concepts are integrated into the writer’s own insights. The writer provides concluding remarks that show analysis and synthesis of ideas. The paper demonstrates that the author, for the most part, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Some of the conclusions, however, are not supported in the body of the paper. 1 The paper demonstrates that the author, to a certain extent, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. The paper does not demonstrate that the author has fully understood and applied concepts learned in the course. Topic Focus (10%) The topic is focused narrowly enough for the scope of this assignment. A thesis statement provides direction for the paper, either by statement or a position or hypothesis. 1 The topic is focused but lacks direction. The paper is about a specific topic but the writer has not established a position. The topic is too broad for the scope of this assignment. The topic is not clearly defined. Depth of Discussion (10%) In-depth discussion & elaboration in all sections of the paper. 1 In-depth discussion & elaboration in most sections of the paper. The writer has omitted pertinent content or content runs-on excessively. Quotations from others outweigh the writer’s own ideas excessively. Cursory discussion in all sections of the paper or brief discussion in only a few sections.
Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice Cohesiveness (10%) Ties together information from all sources. Paper flows from one issue to the next without the need for headings. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. For the most part, ties together information from all sources. Paper flows with only some disjointedness. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. 1 Sometimes ties together information from all sources. Paper does not flow – disjointedness is apparent. Author’s writing does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. Does not tie together information. Paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Headings are necessary to link concepts. Writing does not demonstrate understanding any relationships. Spelling & Grammar (10%) No spelling and/or grammar mistakes Minimal spelling and/or grammar mistakes. Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes. 1 Unacceptable number of spelling and/or grammar mistakes. Sources (10%) More than five current sources, of which at least three are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. Sources include both general background sources and specialized sources. sources and popular literature are acknowledged as such if they are cited. All web sites utilized are authoritative. 1 Five current sources, of which at least two are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are authoritative. Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are credible. Fewer than five current sources, or fewer than two of five are journal articles or scholarly books. Not all web sites utilized are credible, and/or sources are not current. Citations (10%) Cites all data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. 1 Cites most data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. Cites some data obtained from other sources. Citation style is either inconsistent or incorrect. Does not cite sources.
Research methods (15%) – Evaluation ranges include: Methods used accurately; Methods used inaccurately; Methods not reported. Conceptual framework (CF) (5%) – Evaluation ranges include: CF used accurately; CF used inaccurately; CF not included. Data analyses (10%) – Evaluation ranges include: Analyses appropriately applied; Analyses inappropriately applied; Analyses not reported. Research Results (15%) – Evaluation ranges include: Thorough report flows logically from RQs; Insufficient report of results; Results not reported. Effective graphic presentation of research results (5%) – Evaluation ranges include: Graphic research results presented effectively; Graphic research results presented ineffectively; No graphics included. Conclusion (proposed strategies or solutions) (5%) – Evaluation ranges include: Thorough conclusion addresses educational problem or issue; Conclusion merely restates paper content; No conclusion. Balance of paper (intro, body, conclusion) – Evaluation ranges include: Excellent balance of paper sections; Inconsistent balance of paper sections; Poor balance of paper sections. Paper Style (25%) Grammar (10%) – Evaluation ranges include: No errors in usage; Few errors in usage; Frequent errors in usage. Paper Length (10%) – Evaluation ranges include: 20+ pages of text; 17 -19 pages of text; 16 pages or less of text. APA issues (5%) APA Style – Evaluation ranges include: All sources are accurately documented in APA format; Some sources are accurately documented, some are not in APA format; Sources are not documented. 2. Reference list – Evaluation ranges include: List is accurate; List is mostly accurate; List is inaccurate. Use of headers and subheaders – Evaluation ranges include: Effective use; Ineffective use; No headers or subheaders. Supplementing the above criteria from the grading rubric is long feedback to enable the student to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the research study and the resulting paper. This feedback is intended to help students improve their research skills prior to launching their dissertation studies.
Appendix 12.b. Spring 2013 HIED 8330: College Teaching Problems & Issues Research Paper Evaluation Rubric: (N=5) CATEGORY-WEIGHT Satisfactory Low Pass Fail Paper Content (75%) Introduction (5%) Thorough overview of topic from broad to specific 3 Insufficient overview of topic 2 No overview 0 Critical analysis of previous literature (10%) Thorough critical analysis 2 Insufficient critical analysis 3 Rote description 0 Research questions (RQs) (5%) Research questions are accurate 5 Research questions are inaccurate 0 No research questions 0 Research methods (15%) Methods used accurately 4 Methods used inaccurately 1 Methods not reported 0 Conceptual framework (CF) (5%) CF used accurately 3 CF used inaccurately 2 CF not included 0 Data analyses (10%) Analyses appropriately applied 4 Analyses inappropriately applied 1 Analyses not reported 0 Research Results (15%) Thorough report flows logically from RQs 4 Insufficient report of results 1 Results not reported 0 Effective graphic presentation of research results (5%) Graphic research results presented effectively 3 Graphic research results presented ineffectively 2 No graphics included 0 Conclusion (proposed strategies or solutions) (5%) Thorough conclusion addresses educational problem or issue 3 Conclusion merely restates paper content 2 No conclusion 0 Balance of paper (intro, body, conclusion) Excellent balance of paper sections 4 Inconsistent balance of paper sections 1 Poor balance of paper sections 0
CATEGORY-WEIGHT Satisfactory Low Pass Fail Paper Style (25%) Grammar (10%) No errors in usage 0 Few errors in usage 4 Frequent errors in usage 1 Paper Length (10%) 20+ pages of text 4 17 - 19 pages of text 1 16 pages or less of text 0 APA issues (5%) 1. APA Style All sources are accurately documented in APA format. 3 Some sources are accurately documented; some are not in APA format. 2 Sources are not documented. 0 2. Reference list List is accurate 4 List is mostly accurate 1 List is inaccurate 0 3. Use of headers and subheaders Effective use 5 Ineffective use 0 No headers or subheaders 0
Student B HIED 7300: Higher Education in the U.S.: An Overview (Fall 2013) Paper#1 Evaluation Rubric: Low Grade CATEGORY-WEIGHT Satisfactory Low Pass Fail Paper Content (75%) Introduction (5%) Thorough overview of topic Insufficient overview of topic No overview Use of assigned readings (15%) Thorough and complete use Insufficient-incomplete use No use Use of outside readings (10%) Thorough and complete use Insufficient - incomplete use No use Analysis of problem, issue, or topic (15%) Thorough and complete analysis Insufficient – incomplete analysis Rote description Individual viewpoint (voice) Clearly present Unclear in places Not present Arguments accurately supported by literature (10%) Accurately supported by literature Inaccurate – incomplete support No support Accuracy of arguments (10%) All arguments are accurate Some arguments are accurate Arguments are inaccurate Clarity of arguments (5%) All arguments are clear Some arguments are clear Arguments are unclear Balance of paper (intro, body, conclusion) Excellent balance of paper sections Inconsistent balance of paper sections Poor balance of paper sections Conclusion (proposed solutions, strategies, or predictions) (5%) Thorough conclusion Conclusion merely restates paper content No conclusion CATEGORY-WEIGHT Satisfactory Low Pass Fail Paper Style (25%) Grammar (10%) No errors in usage Few errors in usage Frequent errors in usage Paper Length (10%) 10+ pages of text 7-9 pages of text 6 pages or less of text APA issues (5%) 1. APA Style All sources are accurately documented in APA format Some sources are accurately documented; some are not in APA format. Sources are not documented 2. Reference list List is accurate List is mostly accurate List is inaccurate 3. Use of headers and subheaders Effective use Ineffective use No headers or subheaders Student B
Appendix 13 UALR Higher Education Program 2013 Qualifying Exam Evaluations Summary Evaluation/ Exam Section High Pass Pass Low Pass Fail Higher Education Core Courses History & Philosophy 1 3 1 0 Leadership Theories 1 3 1 0 Research Methods Core Courses Quantitative Research 1 2 0 2 Statistics 1 2 0 2 Qualitative Research Re-sit 1 4 Re-sit 1 0 0 Concentration & Elective Courses Finance 1 4 0 0 Governance & Policy 0 5 0 0 Organizational Behavior 0 2 1 0 Legal Aspects of Higher Ed. 0 2 1 0 College Teaching Probs. & Issues 1 1 0 0 College Instruction 0 0 0 0 Curriculum Design 1 1 0 0 Two-Year College Combined 0 0 1 0
successful programmatic accreditation as a signal to administrators and the greater public that the program is viable and of good quality (ASHA, 2011). Leadership in CSD and other higher education programs has garnered increased attention at the national level. The focus on leadership stems from the idea that ineffective leadership of academic units can slow or jeopardize programmatic success (Higgerson & Joyce, 2007). In CSD programs, the chair or program director is primarily responsible for strategic control of the academic unit and for leading important departmental processes such as accreditation. The chair’s role in academic programs is complicated by pressures from central administration, accrediting agencies, state boards of education, granting agencies, and state legislators. As the primary departmental figurehead, chairs must also serve as a primary agent of the central administration. Faculty members may have difficulty grasping that the chair serves in the primary agent role or may disagree with how the chair serves in that role, and, as a result, conflicts may emerge. Heifetz and Linksky (2002) suggest that modern leadership should be viewed as an activity that extends beyond positional power or authority, especially in academe. They further posit that leadership occurs in a context of problems and challenges, with shifting leadership responsibilities beyond authority figures to stakeholders, including faculty, staff, and students in programs. Leadership in higher education needs to help stakeholders accept responsibility for technical and strategic innovation in the face of challenging demands (Scudder & Self, 2010). Unique in many ways, CSD programs house both academic and clinical training components. Additionally, CSD programs often house two professions, audiology and speech pathology with potentially divergent faculty and student foci. Because of these distinctions, leadership in CSD programs can be challenging. Nan Bernstein Ratner (2010), program director