EDD 2011-12 Page 1 of 3
Educational Leadership Doctoral Program – Advanced Preparation
Annual Program Report
Academic Year 2011-12
Tony Norman, Director
January 17, 2013
1. Continuous Assessment Results
a. Admission Data
Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of
Educational Leadership Doctoral (EDD) candidates approved by Graduate Studies and Research
for admission into administrative preparation programs during this academic year.
Table 1. Approved Candidate Test Score Averages
GR GPA
Program
N
Mean
EDD Program
30
3.70
EDD Program*
2
3.68
*Reflects new GRE scores.
GRE
Composite
N
Mean
30
924
2
308
GAP
N
30
2
Mean
3414
675
GRE-V
N
30
2
GRE-Q
Mean
437
158
N
30
2
Mean
486
150
GRE-W
N
25
1
Mean
4.1
4.0
b. Course Based Assessment Data
Table 2 provides the percentage of EDD candidates (N = 22) scoring at each level of proficiency
on critical performances within EDD courses. Proficiency levels are based on a scale of 1 –
Standard Not Met, 2 – Standard Partially Met, 3 – At Standard, and 4 – Above Standard.
Table 2. CP Proficiency Level Percentages
Course
EDLD 702
EDLD-798
Grand Total
1
2
3
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4
100%
100%
100%
Table 3 indicates the level of EDD candidates’ (N = 22) proficiency across critical performances
related to the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). Candidates receiving an
overall rating of 3 or 4 on a CP are considered to have demonstrated proficiency on the
standards associated with the CP.
Table 3. Percent of EALR Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by ISLLC
Program
EDD
1
100%
ISLLC Standards
2
3
4
100%
---
5
--
6
--
*ISLLC Key: 1 – Visionary Leader, 2 – Instructional Leader, 3 – Managerial Leader, 4 –
Collaborative Leader, 5 – Ethical Leader, 6 – Political Leader
EDD 2011-12 Page 2 of 3
As Tables 2 and 3 indicate, no EDD candidates scored below the proficiency level.
c. Clinical Experiences Data
The EDD Leadership Council agreed that dispositions (related to ISLLC Standards 1 – Visionary
Leader and 5 – Ethical Leader) would be collected for the two 3-hour internships (EDLD 798)
that EDD candidates complete as part of their program. In these internships, candidates
experience “on-the-job” opportunities (but away from and/or in addition to their current job
responsibilities) to practice what has been learned in classes and to develop their leadership
abilities. One hundred clock hours of internship activities are required to earn three semester
hours of EDLD 798 credit.
As part of the record verifying the successful completion of the internship, the site supervisor
assesses candidates on their dispositions. Data on these dispositions began to be collected in
spring 2012. Table 4 reports how EDD candidates (N = 8) performed on dispositions as they
completed their internships. Students are considered “proficient” who average 3 or higher on
each disposition category.
Table 4. EDD Proficiency Rates on Unit-Wide Dispositions
Period
End of Internship
WKU Professional Education Dispositions
Values
Values Personal
Values
Values
Learning
Integrity
Diversity Collaboration
100%
100%
100%
100%
d. Culminating Assessment Data
In order to reach “doctoral candidacy” and then eventually exit the EDD program, students
must also successfully complete both the Qualifying Exam (prior to the dissertation) and the
Dissertation. The first two questions on the Qualifying Exam are common across all students
and focus on the overall program goals of candidate proficiency in Leadership and Research.
Although students may proceed who score a “2 – Marginal Pass,” for program assessment
purposes a score of “3 – Pass” is considered “proficient.” Tables 5 and 6 reveal the number of
completing these steps during the academic year.
Candidacy
Requirement
Qualifying Exam
Table 5: EDD Candidates Completing Qualifying Exams
QE
Total N Passing Leadership Total N Passing
Takers
Leadership
Pass Rate
Research
33
29
85%
29
Table 6: EDD Candidates Completing Dissertation
Exit Requirement
Dissertation Defenses
Total Number Pass
Dissertation
22
22
Research Pass
Rate
85%
Pass Rate
100%
EDD 2011-12 Page 3 of 3
e. Exit and Follow Up Data
Attached are the results of our EDD exit survey. Students’ average rating for all items hover
around 4 – Good.
2. Summary of Results by ISLLC Standards and Other Key Conceptual Framework Values
Assessment results indicate that the percentage of leadership program candidates who are
successful and are satisfied with their program exceeds the 80% success/satisfaction criterion
set for programs.
3. Efforts to Report and Disseminate Results
Each semester or at the end of each academic year results from the various assessments are
shared with the EDD Leadership Council.
4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results
As the EDD program continues to develop, the EDD director, Leadership Council, faculty, and
staff have worked to develop more complete assessment processes. Thus, this year critical
performance have been revised and/or added to the following:






EDLD 702 – 2 CPs related to ISLLC Standards 1 and 5
EDLD 712 – 1 CP related to ISLLC Standard 2
EDLD 720 – 1 CP related to ISLLC Standards 2-4
EDLD 722 – 1 CP related ISLLC Standard 2
EDLD 732 – 1 CP related to ISLLC Standards 2-5
EDLD 798 – 1 CP related to ISLLC Standard 2 and 5, Disposition related to ISLLC
Standards 1 and 5
The CPs associated with the research courses (EDLD 712, 722, and 732) are also aligned to
research standards (outcomes) developed specifically for the EDD program.
Also, although not included in this report, course evaluations have been developed that align to
course objectives, as well as program objectives, to ensure that students are receiving the
knowledge and experience each course was designed to provide.
5. Discuss trends in assessment results over the last few years (Please refer back to your
2009-10 and 2010-11 APRs which are posted to the College of Education Professional Education
Unit website)
This is the first APR submitted for the EDD program. Future years will provide trends as
additional and more complete assessment data are collected and new APRs are completed.
Doctoral Exit Survey Results
6
E3_1 Environment
for
Learning-Students
in the program
were treated with
respect.
E3_2
Environment
for
Learning-I
had the
opportunity
to engage in
collaborative
work with
faculty in my
program.
E3_3
Environment
for
Learning-I
had the
opportunity
to engage in
collaborative
work with
other
students in
my program.
E3_4
Environment
for
Learning-My
program
fostered a
sense of
intellectual
community.
E3_5
Environment
for
Learning-My
program
supported my
professional
goals.
E3_6
Environment
for
Learning-The
amount of
coursework
required in
my program
seemed
appropriate.
E3_7 Environment
for
Learning-Courses
in my program
were relevant
for my intended
profession.
E3_8 Environment
for
Learning-Courses
in my program
dealt with
current
developments in
my field.
E3_9
Environment for
Learning-Course
offerings in my
program were
sufficiently
flexible to
meet my needs.
E3_10
Environment
for
Learning-My
program
requirements
were
flexible
enough to
meet my
needs.
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
I
8
4.3
8
3.5
8
4.3
8
4.3
8
3.9
8
3.6
8
3.1
8
3.3
8
3.4
8
4.1
II
3
4.3
3
3.3
3
4.7
3
4.3
3
5.0
3
4.3
3
4.0
3
4.0
3
3.3
3
4.3
III
3
4.7
3
5.0
3
5.0
3
5.0
3
4.7
3
4.0
3
4.0
3
3.7
3
4.0
3
4.3
14
4.4
14
3.8
14
4.5
14
4.4
14
4.3
14
3.9
14
3.5
14
3.5
14
3.5
14
4.2
Cohort
Overall
Range For Ratings Is 1-5
1=Poor Rating
5=Favorable Rating
Doctoral Exit Survey Results
Range For Ratings Is 1-5
1=Poor Rating
5=Favorable Rating
7
E4_1 Intellectual
Environment-...the
intellectual
quality of the
faculty.
E4_2 Intellectual
Environment-...the
faculty’s
knowledge of
current
developments
and/or issues in
the field.
E4_3 Intellectual
Environment-...the
Intellectual
quality of my
fellow graduate
students.
E4_4
Intellectual
Environment-…the
overall quality
of the courses
in this program.
E4_5
Intellectual
Environment-…the
faculty’s use of
varied teaching
strategies to
enhance
learning.
E4_6 Intellectual
Environment-...the
academic standards
in my program.
E4_7 Intellectual
Environment-...the
overall program
quality.
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
I
8
3.8
8
3.8
8
4.0
8
3.9
8
2.9
8
3.9
8
3.9
II
3
5.0
3
4.3
3
4.0
3
4.3
3
4.0
3
4.0
3
4.3
III
3
4.7
3
4.7
3
4.3
3
4.3
3
4.0
3
4.3
3
4.3
Overall
14
4.2
14
4.1
14
4.1
14
4.1
14
3.4
14
4.0
14
4.1
Cohort
Doctoral Exit Survey Results
8
E5_1
Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…a
commitment to
students.
E5_2 Professional
Qualities and Scholarly
Dispositions-…reflective
thinking.
E5_3 Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…ethical
and professional
conduct.
E5_4 Professional
Qualities and Scholarly
Dispositions-…professional
responsibility.
E5_5 Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…respect
for diversity.
E5_6 Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…desire
to work
collaboratively.
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
I
8
3.6
8
4.0
8
4.0
8
3.8
8
3.5
8
4.1
II
3
4.3
3
4.3
3
4.0
3
4.7
3
4.3
3
4.7
III
3
5.0
3
4.7
3
5.0
3
5.0
3
5.0
3
5.0
Overall
14
4.1
14
4.2
14
4.2
14
4.2
14
4.0
14
4.4
Cohort
Range For Ratings Is 1-5
1=Poor Rating
5=Favorable Rating
E5_7
Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…a
commitment to
continuous
professional
improvement.
E5_8 Professional Qualities
and Scholarly
Dispositions-…self-directed
learning.
E5_9 Professional
Qualities and
Scholarly
Dispositions-…respect
for multiple
perspectives.
N
Mean
N
Mean
N
Mean
I
8
3.9
8
4.1
8
3.9
II
3
4.3
3
4.7
3
4.7
III
3
4.7
3
5.0
3
4.7
14
4.1
14
4.4
14
4.2
Cohort
Overall