IPFW Building Level Administrator Program Review
CONTENT PROGRAM SPECIFICS
DOCUMENT 2
A. Content Curriculum Section
Master of Science in Education (M.S.Ed.)
Educational Leadership
Course of Study: Traditional Option
36 credit hours required for degree; 39 credit hours required for license
Rules 2002; Effective Fall 2005
Candidate’s Name: ID# ________________
Teaching License(s) Held:__________________________________________________
Foundational Domain: 9 Semester Hours Grade Semester
One of the following: 3 _____ ________
EDUC P501 Statistical Method Applied to Education
EDUC P503 Introduction to Research
EDUC P507 Testing in the Classroom
One of the following or any other approved P5XX course: 3 _____ ________
EDUC P510 Psychology in Teaching
EDUC P515 Child Development
EDUC P516 Adolescent Development
EDUC P570 Managing Classroom Behavior
One of the following or any other approved H5XX course: 3 _____ ________
EDUC H504 History of American Education
EDUC H520 Education and Social Issues
EDUC H530 Philosophy of Education
EDUC H540 Sociology of Education
EDUC H551 Comparative Education I
Educational Leadership Domain: 27 Semester Hours
EDUC A500 School Administration 3 _____ ________
EDUA T555 Problems in Human Relations & Cultural Awareness 3 _____ ________
EDUC E535 or S503 Elementary or Secondary Curriculum 3 _____ ________
EDUC M501 Lab/Field Experience (Service Learning for Diversity) 0 ________
EDUC A510 School-Community Relations (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A608 Legal Perspectives on Education (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A630 Economic Dimensions of Education (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A638 Public School Personnel Management (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A695 Practicum in School Administration (P: A500, 15 semester hours) 3 _____
________
EDUC M501 Portfolio Check point 0 _____ ________
EDUC E536 or S655 Elementary or Secondary Supervision (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC M501 Lab/Field Experience (Service Learning for Diversity) 0 ________
Additional Course for Administrator License Only
EDUC A625 or A627 Elementary or Secondary School Administration 3 _____ ________
(Grade of “A” or “B”; P: A500)
Master of Science in Education (M.S.Ed.)
Educational Leadership
Course of Study: Cohort Option
36 credit hours
Rules 2002; Effective Fall, 2005
Candidate’s Name: ID# ________________
Teaching License(s) Held:__________________________________________________
Foundational Domain: 3 Semester Hours Grade Semester
One of the following or any other approved H5XX course: 3 _____ ________
EDUC H504 History of American Education
EDUC H520 Education and Social Issues
EDUC H530 Philosophy of Education
EDUC H540 Sociology of Education
EDUC H551 Comparative Education I
Educational Leadership Domain: 33 Semester Hours
EDUC A500 School Administration 3 _____ ________
EDUC E535 or S503 Elementary or Secondary Curriculum 3 _____ ________
EDUC M501 Lab/Field Experience (Service Learning for Diversity) 0 ________
EDUC A510 School-Community Relations (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A608 Legal Perspectives on Education (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A630 Economic Dimensions of Education (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A638 Public School Personnel Management (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC A695 Practicum in School Administration (P: A500, 15 semester hours) 3 _____ ________
EDUC M501 Portfolio Check point 0 _____ ________
EDUC E536 or S655 Elementary or Secondary Supervision (P: A500) 3 _____ ________
EDUC M501 Lab/Field Experience (Service Learning for Diversity) 0 ________
EDUA F500 Quality Process/School Improvement 3 _____ ________
EDUC A720 Workshop on Selected Problems in School Administration 3 _____ ________
EDUC A625 or A627 Elementary or Secondary School Administration 3 _____ ________
(Grade of “A” or “B”; P: A500)
FOR QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE “BUILDING LEVEL
ADMINISTRATOR” LICENSE, PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE.
Building Level Administrator
License requirements for an All Schools Setting
Rules 2002
In addition to the courses listed on the front of this sheet, the following steps are needed to complete
requirements for obtaining an All Schools Setting Building Level Administrator license:
_____ 1. Complete an Educational Leadership Portfolio Assessment.
Check point at the conclusion of A695:
Faculty Signature______________________________________
Review after thirty-six hours of credit are earned.
Faculty Signature______________________________________
_____ 2. Complete A625 or A627 with grade of “B” or higher.
_____ 3. Pass the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA) Praxis exam (minimum
score of “165” effective Jan. 1, 2005).
Score: ______
Please refer to the Praxis website (www.ets.org/praxis) for further information.
4. Provide a letter from your superintendent stating that you have at least two years
of full-time teaching experience under a valid license.
_____ 5. Interview with Educational Leadership Faculty for recommendation of the
license.
Recommended ( ) Not Recommended ( )
Faculty Signature: _______________________________________Date: _________
Faculty Signature: _______________________________________Date: _________
Once you have completed all of the above items, you may apply for the license by completing the
appropriate paperwork provided by the Licensing Office, Neff 243.
Course Descriptions
EDUC A500: School Administration, Cr. 3.
Organization and structure of the school system; legal basis of school administration; agencies of
administration and control; and standards for administration in the various functional areas. Graduate
level only.
EDUC A508: School Law & The Teachers, Cr. 3.
Legal problems affecting teachers, including state and federal relations to education, church-state issues,
teacher liability, employment, contracts, assignment, dismissal, tenure, retirement, teacher rights and
welfare, and pupil control. Graduate level only.
EDUC A510: School-Community Relations, Cr. 2-3.
C: A500. For teachers and school administrators. Characteristics of the community-school, including
multicultural quality of the resources, adapting the educational program to community needs; use of
community resources in instruction; planning school-community relations. Graduate level only.
EDUC A554: Computer Applications For Administrators, Cr. 3.
An overview of computer programs for education. Primary emphasis on administrative applications for
pupil, staff, facility, program and financial accounting. Graduate level only.
EDUC A590: Independent Study In School Administration, Cr. 1-3.
Individual research or study with a school administration faculty member, arranged in advance of
registration. A one- or two-page written proposal should be submitted to the instructor during the first
week of the term specifying the scope of the project, project activities, meeting times, completion date
and student product(s). Ordinarily, A590 should not be used for the study of material taught in regularly
scheduled course. Graduate level only.
EDUC A600: Problems In School Administration, Cr. 3.
P: A500. Designed to identify practical school problems, determine issues, develop skills, and formulate
concepts. A workshop in which case-concept method is used in determining behavioral patterns.
Graduate level only.
EDUC A608: Legal Perspectives On Education, Cr. 3.
P:A500. Overview of the legal framework affecting the organization and administration of public
schools, including church-state issues, pupil rights, staff-student relationships, conditions of
employment, teacher organizations, tort liability, school finance, and desegregation. Graduate level only.
EDUC A625: Administration Of Elementary Schools, Cr. 3.
P:A500 or permission of instructor. For persons preparing for administrative or supervisory positions.
Role of the principal as a professional leader in development and operation of school property. Graduate
level only.
EDUC A627: Secondary School Administration, Cr 3.
P:A500. For secondary administrators. Teacher selection and promotion, program-making, load,
adjustment, pupil personnel, library, cafeteria, study organization, athletics, reports and records.
Graduate level only.
EDUC A630: Economic Dimensions Of Education, Cr. 3.
P:A500. Includes current problems in school support, costs of education, sources of school revenue,
state and federal support, state and local control in school finance, and legal basis of school finance.
Graduate level only.
EDUC A635: Public School Budgeting & Accounting, Cr. 3.
P: A500. This course is a study of the public school budgeting and accounting functions necessary to
prepare an annual budget and then administer that budget. Many facets of school business administration
will be analyzed. Focus will be on the knowledge base necessary for school business administrators and
all educators to provide the leadership and support as practitioners and participants in a complex,
important, and rewarding area of Indiana public schools and communities. Graduate level only.
EDUC A638: Public School Personnel Management, Cr. 3.
P:A500. The background, present conditions, and future directions of school personnel management;
development and implementation of a school personnel management program; and examination of
problems and issues. Graduate level only.
EDUC A640: Planning Educational Facilities, Cr. 3.
Study of the basic concepts in planning educational facilities as they relate to educational needs,
educational specifications, forms and shapes, flexibility, learning environment, and renovation and
modernization. Graduate level only.
EDUC A650: Collective Bargaining: Education, Cr. 3.
P: A500. This course is a study of union movement, labor legislation, representation elections, the
collective bargaining process, contract administration and conflict resolution. The focus of the course
will be on current issues in labor relations and the evolution of private and public sector bargaining
practices in education. The impact on human resource management is analyzed. Graduate level only.
EDUC A653: The Organizational Context Of Education, Cr. 3.
P:A500. Organizational factors examined in terms of impact on human behavior and student learning.
The critical role of administrative policies and practices in shaping the organizational context.
Alternative organizational designs and administrative strategies studied in terms of their effectiveness
under specified conditions. Graduate level only.
EDUC A695: Practicum In School Administration, Cr. 3.
P: Master's degree, A630 and A638, consent of instructor. Provides for closely supervised field
experience in various areas of school administration. Graduate level only.
EDUC A720: Workshop on Selected Problems in School Admin., Cr. 1-6.
Individual and group study. One credit hour is offered for each week of full-time work. Graduate level
only.
EDUC E536: Supervision of Elementary School Instruction, Cr. 3.
P:A500. Modern concepts of supervision and the evolutionary process through which they have
emerged. Supervisory work of the principal, general supervisor, and supervisor of consultant. Study of
the group processes in a democratic school system. Graduate level only..
EDUA F500: The Quality Process/School Improvement, Cr. 3.
EDUC H504: History Of American Education, Cr. 3.
A study of education, both informal and institutional, in American history, leading to an understanding
of present educational theory and practice. Designed for graduate students who seek to develop an
historical perspective of education in America. Graduate level only.
EDUC H520: Education And Social Issues, Cr. 3.
Identification and analysis of major problems set for education by the pluralistic culture of American
society. Graduate level only.
EDUC H530: Philosophy Of Education, Cr. 3.
A study of representative topics in the philosophy of education. Graduate level only.
EDUC H540: Sociology Of Education, Cr. 3.
A study of representative topics in the sociology of education. Graduate level only.
EDUC H551: Comparative Education I, Cr. 3.
Introduction to comparative method in the study of educational systems in different societies. Provides
students with conceptual and methodological tools from the field of education and related disciplines,
such as sociology, political science, anthropology, and economics, for studying societal school systems
in depth and making international and cross-cultural comparisons. Graduate level only.
EDUC M501: Lab/Field Experience, Cr. 0-3.
EDUC P501: Statistical Method Applied to Elucidation, Cr. 3.
Problems in statistical analysis, taken from education and psychology, including computation and
interpretation of averages, variance, coefficients of correlation; introduction to hypothesis testing.
Graduate level only.
EDUC P503: Introduction to Research, Cr. 3.
Methods and procedures in educational research. Graduate level only.
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
Program Coursework
A510
A608 A630 A638
A695
E536
S655
F500
Standard #1: A vision of learning.
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by facilitating the development, articulation,
implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by the greater school community.
Knowledge
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. learning goals in a pluralistic
1,9
1,8
1
3
4,6
society.
(Reflect)
M501
A608
A630 A638
M501
T555
S503
A695
2. the principles of developing and
implementing strategic plans.
4
3. theories of educational leadership
(e.g., the categories of systems
theory, change theory, and
theory).data collection,
4. motivational
information sources,
1,9
(Class
Disc.)
8
1,8
1,8
4
and data analysis strategies.
5. effective communication (e.g.,
writing, speaking, listening, use of
technology).
1,4
1
6. negotiation skills for consensus
building.
7. the foundations of education.
8,9
(PPT)
9
(Class
Disc.)
9,
(Class
Disc.)
1,8
1,4,9
(Class
Disc.)
1,4,9,8
(Class
Disc.)
4
8
8
4
1,8
1
8
1,4,9
(Class
Disc.)
8
1,
9
(Class
Disc.
8
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
E386
A625
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
A510
Program Coursework
A608 A630
A638
A695
E536
S655
F500
Standard #2: School Culture and Instructional Program..
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students and staff by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a
school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth.
Knowledge
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. school cultures.
1,9
1,9
1,4
4,6
1,8
1A0A0 6,8
E386
(Case
(Case
A630 A638
S503
A625
Stds.)
Stds.)
2. student growth and development.
8
4
3. applied learning theories.
8
4. applied motivational theories.
5. curriculum design,
implementation, evaluation, and
refinement.
6. principles of effective instruction.
1,8
1
1,3,8
9
(Class
Disc.)
1,3,8
7. measurement, evaluation, and
assessment strategies.
8. diversity and its meaning for
educational programs.
3,8
3,9
(Class
Disc
1,5,8
8
4
4
8,9
(Class
Disc)
4,9
(Case
Stds.)
9
(Class
Disc.)
4
8,9
(Budg.
Analys.)
8
9
(Case
Stds.)
9. adult learning and professional
development models.
1,8
10. the change process for systems,
organizations, and individuals.
1,4
8
11. the role of technology in
promoting student learning and
professional growth.
9
(Tech.
Log)
8
8
1
1
8
1,8
1,8
3,9
(Case
Stds)
4,9
(Class
Disc.)
1,4
4,6
1,8
1,8
1,8
1,8
4,6
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards
Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
A510
A608
Program Coursework
A630
A638
Standard #3: Management
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students and staff by ensuring
organization, operations, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment.
Knowledge :
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. theories and models of
1,3,4
9
8
1,9
organizations and the
(Case
(Class
principles of organizational
Stds.)
Disc.)
development.
2. human resources
1,3
1
8
1,3,4,9
management and
(Disc.,
development.
Case Stds.
Journ Artic.)
3. operational policies and
9
1,8
6,8
3,9
procedures at the school
(Case
(Case
and district level.
Stds.,
Stds., Disc.)
Disc.)
4. principles and issues
9
1,8
4
8,9
8,9
relating to school safety and
(Case
(Case
(Class
security.
Stds.)
Stds.,
Disc.)
Disc.)
5. principles and issues
9
1,8
1,4,6, 9
relating to fiscal operations
(Case
8
(Class
of school management.
Stds.)
Disc.)
6.
principles and issues
relating to school facilities
and use of space.
7.
legal issues impacting
school operations.
8.
current technologies which
support management
functions.
A695
E536
S655
F500
management of the
4,8
1,8
4,8
8,9
(Class
Disc.)
8
1,4,6
8
9
(Class
Disc.)
1,3,4,
8
1,8
8
3
8,9
(Class
Disc.)
4,6
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
A510
Program Coursework
A608 A630 A638
A695
E536
S655
F500
Standard #4: Collaboration with Families and the Community.
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by collaborating with families and community
members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources.
Knowledge
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. emerging issues and trends that
1,3,4,9
1,3,8 8
1,3,4
1,4,8
1,8
8
4
4,8
potentially impact the school
(Case
community.
Stds.)
2. the conditions and dynamics of
9 (Journ.
1,3,8
4
4
8
8
9
4,8
the diverse school community
Articles,
(Class
(e.g., social, cultural, leadership,
Class Disc.
Disc.)
historical, and political).
3. community resources (e.g.,
parental, business, governmental
agencies, community, and social
services).
1,3,8
4. community relations and
marketing strategies and
processes.
8
5. successful models of school,
family, business, community,
government, and higher
education partnerships.
8
9
(Class
Disc.
1,8,9
(Class
Disc
8
8
1,3,8
9
(Case
Stds.)
1,8,9
(Case
Stds.)
8
8
6. community and district power
structures.
1,9
(Class
Disc.)
8
1,8
1,3,8
1,8
8
1
8
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
A510
Program Coursework
A608 A630 A638
A695
E536
S655
F500
Standard #5: Acting with Integrity and Fairness and in an Ethical Manner.
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students and staff by acting with integrity and fairness and in an
ethical manner.
Knowledge
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. the purpose of education and the
1,3,9
8
1,9
9
1,8
9
role of leadership in a changing
(Dispos.,
(Case
(Class
(Class
society.
Self Assess.)
Stds.)
Disc.)
Disc.)
2. the values, ethics, and
challenges of the diverse school
community.
1,3
1,3,8,
9
(Class
Disc.)
3. professional codes of ethics.
9
(Class Disc.)
8
1,4,9
(Case
Stds.)
8
9
(Case
Stds.,
Class
Disc.)
1,8
8
8
1,3,9
(Case
Stds.)
8
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
SECTION B
Educational Leadership Content Standards Alignment Matrix
Administrative Leadership
Content Standards Indicators
A500
T555
E535
S503
A625
A627
A510
Program Coursework
A608 A630 A638
A695
E536
S655
F500
Standard #6: The Political, Social, Economic, Legal, and Cultural Context.
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students and staff by understanding, responding to, and
influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context.
Knowledge
The administrator has knowledge and understanding of:
1. principles of representative
1,3,8
1
1,3,8
governance that support the
system of American schools.
2. the role of public education in
developing and renewing a
democratic society and an
economically productive nation.
3. the law as related to education and
schooling.
9
(Class
Disc.)
1,3,8
9
(Class
Disc.)
8
4. the political, social, cultural, and
economic systems that impact
schools.
1,9
(Class
Disc.)
1,3,8
9
(Class
Disc.)
9
(Class
Disc.)
1,4,9
(Case
Stds.)
1,3,8
1,3,8
8
1,3,8
1,3,8
3,8
1,4,9
(Class
Disc.)
8
8
8
5. models and strategies of change
and conflict resolution as applied to
the larger political, social, cultural,
and economic contexts of
schooling.
6. global issues and forces affecting
teaching and learning.
3
1,3,8
9
(Class
Disc.)
8
7. the dynamics of policy
development and advocacy under
our democratic political system.
8. the importance of diversity and
equity in a democratic society.
9
(Class
Disc.)
9
(Journ.
Articles)
8
1
4
1,3,8
4
1,3,8
1,9
(Disc.,
Case
Stds.)
4
1,3,8
9
(Disc.,
Case
Stds.)
8
8
3
1,3
3,8
8
Performance Assessment Examples: (1) Paper, (2) Exams/Quiz: Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay,
(4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflections, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify).
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
C. Assessment Data Section
Element
Assessed
Describe
the
Assessment
Activity
When is it
assessed?
Title of the
Instrument or
Rubric (Attach
copies)
Content
Knowledge
for Other
School
Candidates
1)
Praxis II
(required of
all
programs)
2)
Technology
Assessment
End of
Program/
Prior to
Licensing
Praxis II results
End of
Practicum
& at Exit
Rubric aligned
with the
Conceptual
Framework*
&
Technology
Experience
Reflection
Rubric
Professional
Knowledge
and Skills
for Other
School
Candidates
1)
Portfolio
Total
Average
Score
&
Pull-out of
ISLLC
Assessment
End of
Student
Practicum
2)
In courses
E535/S503
&
E536/S655
&
End of
Student
Practicum
Diversity
Reflection
Assessment
&
Student’s
Evaluation of
their own
Performance
Assessment of
Ability to
Support
Student
Learning and
Development
Principal’s
Assessment
of
Practicum
Student
End of
Student
Practicum
Portfolio
Assessment
aligned with
Mission
Statement,
Conceptual
Framework,
&
ISLLC*
Diversity
Reflection
Rubric aligned
with CF
&
Disposition
Self Assessment
aligned with
Mission
Statement*
Disposition
Principal’s
Assessment
aligned with
Mission
Statement*
Aggreg
ated
Summa
ry Data
for last
3 years
Curriculum/Program/
Unit operations
modifications made
based on this data
Content Standards
addressed by this
Assessment
Activity
(Be consistent with
#B Standards
Matrix)
See
Table
1.1
See “History of
Change” below
1,2,3,4,5,6
See
Table
1.2 &
1.3
See “History of
Change” below
1,2,5,6
1,2
See
Table
1.4
&
Table
1.41
See “History of
Change” below
1,2,3,4,5,6
See
Table
1.5&
1.6
See “History of
Change” below
1,2,4,5,6
1,2,3,4,5,6
See
Table
1.7
&
1.71 &
1.72
See “History of
Change” below
2
* For alignment of the SOE Conceptual Framework and the SOE Mission Statement with ISLLC Standards, see below.
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
C. 2 Alignment of Standards, Assessment Tables, and Assessment Rubrics
SOE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
ISLLC
STANDARDS
1. Vision
1.
Democracy
& Community
x
2.
Habits of
Mind
3.
Pedagogy
4.
Knowledge
x
x
x
6. Politics
x
x
x
x
x
x
4. Collaboration
5. Ethics
6.
Leadership
x
2. Learning Culture
3. Management
5.
Experience
x
x
x
x
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
SOE MISSION STATEMENT
Candidate demonstrates the capacity and willingness to continuously improve schools and related
entities so that they become more effective by:
ISLLC
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
1.
Vision
1)
becoming
more caring,
humane, and
functional
citizens in a
global,
multicultural
democratic
society;
2)
improving
the human
condition
by creating
positive
learning
environments;
4)
solving
client
problems
through
clear,
creative
analysis;
5)
assessing client
performance,
creating and
executing
effective
teaching,
educational
leadership by
utilizing a
variety of
methodologies
reflecting
current related
research;
x
2.
Learning
Culture
x
3.
Management
x
4.
Collaboration
x
5.
Ethics
x
6.
Politics
3)
becoming
change
agents by
demonstrating
reflective
professional
practice;
x
x
x
x
x
x
6)
utilizing
interdisciplin
ary
scholarship,
demonstrating
technological
and critical
literacy, and
effectively
communicating with all
stakeholders;
x
7)
establishing
and
maintaining
professional
relationships and
collaborating
effectively
in order to
achieve
common
school
goals.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Table 1
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
1.1
Praxis II Results
Lowest Passing Score 165
Highest Possible Score 200
1.2
Technology Experience Reflection
Rubric aligned with Conceptual
Framework
N=31
Avg_score=187.4
Min_score=166
Max_score=199
N= 20
Avg_score = 3.6
Min_score = 2
Max_score = 4
N=13
Avg_score=174.2
Min_score=165
Max_score=184
N= 32
Avg_score =3.75
Min_score = 2
Max_score = 4
NA
##N= 47
1.3
Technology Experience Reflection Avg_score = 3.8
Rubric
Min_score = 3
Max_score= 4
N= 26
Avg_score = 3.7
Min_score = 1
Max_score = 4
N= 32
Avg_score = 3.6
Min_score = 1
Max_score = 4
N= 55
1.4
Portfolio Assessment
Avg_score = 107.5
(See below Table 1.41 for pull-out Min_score = 88
Max_score = 116
data on ISLLC Standards.)
**N= 32
Avg_score = 88.2
Min_score = 67
Max_score = 97
N= 32
Avg_score = 87
Min_score = 76.5
Max_score = 97
N= 32
Avg_score = 3.5
Min_score = 1
Max_score = 4
1.5
Diversity Reflection Rubric
N= 17
Avg_score = 3.2
Min_score = 0
Max_score= 4
N= 42
Avg_score = 3.4
Min_score = 0
Max_score= 4
N= 15
Avg_score = 3.5
Min_score = 2
Max_score = 4
1.6
Disposition Self Assessment
(See below Table 1.71 and 1.72
for comparison of Candidate Self
Assessment and Principal
Assessment.)
1.7
Disposition Principal Assessment
N= 30
Avg_score = 3.4
Min_score = 2.5
Max_score = 4
N= 13
Avg_score = 3.6
Min_score = 3
Max_score = 4
N= 30
Avg_score = 3.4
Min_score = 2.5
Max_score = 4
NA
N= 32
Avg_score = 3.75
Min_score = 3
Max_score= 4
N= 32
Avg_score = 3.5
Min_score = 0
Max_score= 4
(See below Table 1.71 for pull-out
items aligned with ISLLC
Standard 2, Learning Culture.)
(See below Table 1.72 for
comparative data for the
Disposition Student Self
Assessment.)
**Portfolio scoring system was changed.
## For that year data were entered for 4 checkpoints Introductory, 18 hour, 33 hour and Capstone.
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Professional Knowledge and Skills 1)
ISLLC Standards Assessment in Portfolio submitted in Practicum
Table 1.41
ISLLC
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007 (Fall)
Standards
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
% scores of 4&3= % scores of 4&3= % scores of 4&3=
excellent/good
excellent/good
excellent/good
%4
%3
%4
%3
%4
%3
1. Vision
73.33% 20.00%
71%
25%
53.13% 34.38%
2. Learning Culture
79.09%
17.88%
66%
26%
54.69%
26.56%
3. Management
88.48%
9.70%
68%
29%
64.63%
26.56%
4. Collaboration
79.39%
16.06%
64%
33%
59.38%
29.69%
5. Ethics
70.91%
21.52%
62%
34%
68.75%
25.00%
6. Politics
64.55%
25.45%
64%
30%
54.69%
37.50%
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Assessment of Ability to Support Student Learning and Development
Table 1.71
Disposition
Principal
Assessment:
Items 2, 4, 5 of
Rubric =
ISLLC
Standard 2,
Learning Culture
2006
2006
2007
2007
Spring
Fall
Spring
Fall
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
% scores of
% scores of
% scores of
% scores of
4&3=
4&3=
4&3=
4&3=
excellent/good excellent/good excellent/good excellent/good
%4
%3
%4
%3
%4
%3
%4
%3
71%
29%
86%
14%
81%
19%
61%
35%
67%
33%
83%
17%
69%
31%
61%
35%
5) assessing client
57%
performance,
creating and
executing effective
teaching,
educational
leadership by
utilizing a variety of
methodologies
reflecting current
related research
% = relatively high scores
43%
67%
33%
58%
42%
68%
26%
Candidate
demonstrates
capacity to improve
schools by:
2) improving the
human condition by
creating positive
learning
environments
4) solving client
problems through
clear, creative
analysis
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Assessment of Ability to Support Student Learning and Development
Table 1.72
Disposition
Student
Self Assessment:
Items 2, 4, 5 of
Rubric =
ISLLC
Standard 2,
Learning Culture
2006
2006
2007
2007
Spring
Fall
Spring
Fall
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
(scale 4-0)
% scores of
% scores of
% scores of
% scores of
4&3=
4&3=
4&3=
4&3=
excellent/good excellent/good excellent/good excellent/good
%4
%3
%4
%3
%4
%3
%4
%3
53%
38%
83%
17%
86%
14%
53%
47%
23%
53%
50%
33%
14%
86%
23%
47%
5) assessing client
26%
53%
67%
33%
43%
performance,
creating and
executing effective
teaching,
educational
leadership by
utilizing a variety of
methodologies
reflecting current
related research
% = relatively low scores; % = relatively high scores
57%
40%
47%
Candidate
demonstrates
capacity to improve
schools by:
2) improving the
human condition by
creating positive
learning
environments
4) solving client
problems through
clear, creative
analysis
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Assessment Instruments
The assessment instruments and /or scoring guides/rubrics for assessments included on the assessment
data descriptions can be found on pages 21-54 of the IPFW School of Education Program Guides & Unit
Assessment System. Please use the following link.
http://www.ipfw.edu/educ/assets/documents/UAS-EDUCATIONAL%20LEADERSHIP%20%20FALL%202007_1.pdf
C. 3 History of Change
 Table 1.1 data reveal a 100% pass rate for candidates taking the Praxis II examination. We are
pleased with these results, but we continue to make improvements in the program to sustain this high
pass rate. We feel we strengthened the program when we hired two new tenure track faculty, one in
2005 and one in 2006, with specializations in School Law and School Finance, resulting in fewer
adjunct instructors, and an ever higher quality program.
 Table 1.2 and 1.3 data reveal that candidates score 3.5 or higher (scale 0-4 hi) on both measures of
the technology knowledge and skills. A score of 4 equates to “excellence.” Table 1.2 data, which is
aligned with the SOE Conceptual Framework, show the candidates are meeting the ISLLC Standards
as well (See Alignment of SOE Conceptual Framework and ISLLC Standards above). The candidate
technology log was updated in 2006-2007 to include the latest technologies.
 Table 1.4 data indicate that candidates scored high on their portfolios, which they submit during the
Practicum. The portfolio requirements and scoring system have been continually refined as we
respond to the assessment data we generate from them, the complexities of assessing them and
seeking consistency in the evaluators, and candidate feedback about the process of preparing the
portfolios during their Practicum.
 Table 1.41 pulls out the candidates’ performance on the ISLLC Standards, which are assessed in
two parts of the portfolio. The data for each of the three years are difficult to assess because 1) the
rating scale changed in the second year, 2006-2007, 2) changes were made in the curriculum in
2006-2007 to address deficiencies noted in the 2005-2006 data, and 3) new methods were tried to
train assessors of the portfolios to attain greater consistency in assessment scores and that influenced
the outcome of the assessments in Fall 2007. Given those caveats, the data in 2005-2006 show that
the candidates scored very high in Management but low on Vision and Politics. In response,
textbooks were added to A500, A625/627, and A695 to improve candidate comprehension of these
standards. The faculty was particularly concerned that candidates scored low in Vision, and tried to
balance the Vision vs. Management approaches to leadership through candidate course work. In
addition, F500 was added to the course offerings to expose candidates to the quality process. At the
conclusion of the 2005-2006 academic year, the number of reflections candidates were required to
write in their practicum portfolios was reduced to ensure greater depth in individual reflections. In
2006-2007 the data show that Vision is now the highest scoring category, indicating to us that the
changes made in response to the 2005-2006 data had been very effective. The data for 2005-2006
and 2006-2007 show that Ethics was also on the low side. Some faculty read that as a mandate to
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
make ethical issues more central to their teaching in all courses. The data for Fall 2007 demonstrate
that candidates score highest in Ethics. The data for Fall 2007 show generally lower scores in all
areas except Ethics. We attribute this to the more rigorous assessment guidelines that assessors are
following. We also believe the scores will be higher when compiled with the Spring 2008 scores. In
all, these data show how we continually learn from data and make improvements in the program in
response.
 Table 1.5 data indicate an average score of 3.2-3.5 on the Diversity Reflection Rubric. We view this
as successful. Narrative reports on this assessment, required by the UAS, indicate a broad variety of
Service Learning for Diversity field placements and accolades by the candidates for the breadth of
perspective they gain through these experiences. They increase candidates’ professional knowledge
about diversity and give them opportunities to develop leadership skills in the area of diversity.
 Table 1.6 data indicate that candidates assess themselves as relatively successful on the Disposition
Self Assessment that they complete during the Practicum. The rubric is aligned with the SOE
Mission Statement, which is aligned with the ISLLC Standards (See Alignment Matrix of SOE
Mission Statement and ISLLC Standards above). Averages, however, hide the details of how
candidates rate themselves on individual standards. Perhaps what is most striking is that the
candidates rate themselves consistently lower than do their principal’s in the Disposition Principal
Assessment. (See Table 1.72 below for comparable data to the Disposition Principal Assessment,
Table 1.71.)
 Table 1.7 data indicate that the Principals have been pleased with candidate performance in the
Practicum. For further details, see Table 1.71.
 Table 1.71: The pull out data from Fall 2006-Fall 2007 by semester on items 2, 4, and 5, which
align with ISLLC Standard 2, Learning Culture, seem particularly good data to measure the impact
of our candidates on their “Ability to Support Student Learning and Development.” Because the
scores were generally high, and significantly higher than the candidates assessed themselves, the
faculty concluded that scores were somewhat inflated, thus Practicum supervisors made efforts to
explain to the cooperating principals, as well as the candidates, that the assessment is designed to
give candidates meaningful and critical feedback. That feedback would not impact candidates’
overall grade for the course, but would help them improve their performance.
 Table 1.72 data of the scores candidates gave themselves during the Practicum make possible a
comparison to the assessments principals gave to those same candidates for those same semesters
(Table 1.71). The candidates assessed themselves significantly lower. We interpret this to mean that
the candidates are very self critical.
 All of our data gathering revealed a need for a rubric and scoring system for the “Exit Interview”
process, which was created and implemented in 2007-2008. (See UAS Guidelines, at link noted
above, for this assessment instrument, pp. 44-49.)
 The Practicum Program Guide was revised in Summer 2005 and June 2006, and the Unit
Assessment booklet was revised in Fall 2007 to reflect our increased knowledge about and changes
to the assessment process.
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
New Understandings
Over the course of the last three years the Educational Leadership Program in School of
Education (SOE) has experienced an increase in the number of students entering the program. To meet
the needs of a growing and diverse student population, the program added a cohort system of delivery to
the existing traditional delivery style. Student feedback from the early cohort groups prompted the
reduction in adjunct faculty and modifications to the summer session class schedule. In addition,
traditional track students were allowed to attend cohort classes when traditional courses closed due to
low enrollment. Incoming students are also provided an annual orientation presented by faculty and the
students of the graduating cohort.
Data collected through the Unit Assessment System has driven many modifications in the
Educational Leadership program as well as modifications in the Unit Assessment System itself. Faculty
made pedagogical adjustments to target specific standards. Furthermore, the exit interview process was
revised this year to collect data to aid in assessing candidate growth from the midpoint of the candidates’
program to the conclusion. The high passing rates of our candidates on the Indiana Praxis Exam have
provided the Educational Leadership faculty the impetus to continue to promote the application of the
SOE Mission Statement, SOE Conceptual Framework, and the ISLLC Standards. To reduce the
complexity of the logistics involved with assessing the candidate portfolios and the subsequent data
entry, the Educational Leadership Program will begin the process of implementing electronic portfolios.
Because of the University’s impending use of eLumen for assessment purposes, the chosen electronic
portfolio must be compatible.
C. 4 Summary of Unit Reflection Advanced Programs
Unit-Wide Changes
Over the course of the last three years the School of Education (SOE) has been impacted by changes
external and internal to it. The Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW) Faculty
Senate’s Education Policy Committee (EPC) has articulated a pedagogical framework for the
Baccalaureate degree (Senate Document 05-8) and the Senate General Education Subcommittee has
articulated student learning outcomes for the General Education requirements of all Baccalaureate
degrees. This affects our Initial programs. At the same time, with an impending North Central
Association accreditation of the University in Spring of 2010, and with the thrust from the Report of the
Commission on the Future of Higher Education (2006) under Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings
to assess the learning of students in institutions of higher education, the University is in the process of
inaugurating an electronic data assessment system, eLumen, that would allow for data to be gathered at
the course level, but used at the school level and the University level for assessment purposes. While we
in the SOE have developed our own Data Management System, we will soon be in the process of
migrating some aspects of our DMS data to eLumen..
The Indiana General Assembly has required Indiana University to reach articulation agreements with
Ivy Tech Community College, effective with the freshman 2008 class. The mandated articulation with
Ivy Tech Community College requires curricular changes in selected programs. So far this has mainly
affected the Initial programs. We have worked together with other Indiana University (IU) campuses
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
through the Indiana University Education Council, with faculty representatives from all IU campuses, to
coordinate a joint response to the articulation agreement.
The School of Education formed two departments, Educational Studies and Professional Studies, in
2000. The Faculty Affairs Committee of the SOE is in the process of rewriting the Governance
Document to reflect those changes, and the departments are developing their own governance
documents. At the same time the University is promoting an initiative to have Chairs take additional
decision-making responsibility for decisions currently made by Deans. Thus, the Governance Document
will reflect a more clearly articulated division of rights and responsibilities between departments and the
SOE, as well as, overall, more powers to departments than previously. This means that curricular
authority is moving from the school level to the departmental level.
In November of 2005 we had an NCATE Focused Visit on Standard 2 for the Advanced Programs. In
preparation for that we developed a UAS for Advanced degree programs in Elementary and Secondary,
Educational Leadership, and Counseling. We review the assessment data from these programs each year
at a Faculty Retreat in August before the fall semester begins. Through this process we are able to finetune the UAS of each program. We also meet regularly with the Dean’s Community Advisory Council
to give us feedback and recommendations for possible changes to our programs, or the introduction of
new programs.
We are currently, Spring 2008, reviewing all of our programs through the State, two years before our
next NCATE Visit in 2010. The Advanced programs under review are Gifted and Talented, Reading,
Building Level Administrator, and School Counselor. We have been preparing for these reviews for the
past two years. All SOE Faculty members have been involved in the process. Preparation of the reviews
has helped us look candidly at our programs as well as each program’s UAS, and given us renewed
focus on meeting content standards.
During the last three years we have been in the process of introducing electronic portfolios to our
candidates. We chose TaskStream as our e-portfolio provider. While Initial licensure candidates have
had the e-portfolio as an option since we piloted it in 2005, as of Fall 2007 all candidates in the Initial
programs are required to use TaskStream. Because of the University’s impending use of eLumen for
assessment purposes, we are not sure how, or if, TaskStream data can be migrated into it. The Advanced
programs, particularly Building Level Administrator and School Counselor, have also been trying to
initiate use of TaskStream. This task has been slowed, however, as these two programs have been
revising their UAS documents based on feedback from their assessment data, as well as the input of
newly hired faculty into the respective programs.
The Building Level Administrator program is in the process of transitioning from a traditional program
to a cohort program, in which the degree and licensure are attainable in 14 months. This delivery format
has proved very successful, and new cohorts are being formed every Spring and Summer I semesters.
Other Advanced programs, the Elementary and Secondary programs, the Elementary-Early Childhood
Emphasis, and the newly developed Special Education program, are considering similar, non-traditional
delivery formats as the SOE seeks to meet student needs and deliver ever-better, high-quality programs.
We have been continually responding to mandates from external agencies—the Secretary of Education,
NCATE, the Indiana Department of Education—as well as IU, the IPFW Senate, the IPFW Office of
SECTION C
Educational Leadership Assessment Data Document
Academic Affairs, the IPFW Assessment Council, SOE colleagues, our program colleagues, our
candidates, and our stakeholders, all with the purpose of improving our programs. The aggregated
content program assessment data give us valuable feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of our
programs as we make changes within the context of the multiple mandates that frame all of our work
D. Faculty Section
Faculty Name
Highest Degree
Attained
Area(s) of
Specialization
Abbot, Jeff
J.D. & Ph.D.
Educational
Leadership
Batagiannis,
Stella
Ph.D.
Educational
Leadership
Garvey, F. Pat
Ed.D
Educational
Leadership
Vesely,
Randall
Ph.D.
Educational
Leadership
Courses Taught
in Program
A510
A608
A615
A638
A720
E536/S655
F500
A500
A510
A638
A625
A627
A695
A500
A510
A625/627
A630
A635
A695
E535/S655
A695
E535
A630
T555
M501
S503
Additional
Responsibility
in Program
n/a
Years of P-12
Experience
29
Coordinator,
Program
Assessment
2005-07
31
Director,
Educational
Leadership
34
Coordinator,
Program
Assessment
2007-08
10