Master of Education in Educational Leadership:
School Leadership K-12 Emphasis
Brief Program History
The Master’s degree in Educational Leadership at NAU was created in the late 1980’s as part of
a nationwide trend among Education professionals to move from a program training school
administrators to one that focused on teaching candidates important leadership skills. At that
time, all courses moved from the EdAd prefix to EDL prefix and all courses were renumbered.
Before 2002, the state standard for certification was 54 graduate credit hours plus 30 credit
hours of educational leadership/school administration. Of the 30 hour requirement for
coursework in educational leadership/school administration, 21 hours (i.e., 7 courses) were
identified in State Board of Education rule language. The remaining 9 credit hours (3 courses)
could be from elective coursework. NAU met this requirement by offering a 54 graduate
semester hour program in Educational leadership that included 15 hours of Educational
Leadership coursework, 12 hours of Foundations coursework, 21 hours of required certification
courses, and 6 hours of electives. NAU offered coursework to 30+ regional sites through
Interactive Instructional Television using full-time faculty and in-person coursework through
part-time faculty.
In 2002, the state department of education (ADE) changed the requirement for principal
certification, reducing the overall number of credit hours to 36, of which 21 hours of specific
coursework were identified in certification rule language. NAU continued to offer only the 54
hour program until 2006 when the Department of Educational Leadership changed the
curriculum to include 2 tracks for degree candidates: a 36 hour program leading directly to
Arizona certification as a principal and a 54 hour program in leadership with an embedded
graduate certificate that could be used for obtaining principal certification. The 54 hour
Master’s degree program in leadership was designed to address the needs of teacher-leaders
who might want to study leadership, but did not want to change job or roles in the K-12 system
to become a school principal.
In 2006, Educational Leadership determined that all classes in the 54 hour Master’s degree
should be offered in an online delivery method. At least 9 hours (i.e., 3 classes) in the state
regulated certification program for Principal certification were not available to be moved to
online delivery. In 2008, EDL change all certification courses from 700-level prefix numbers to
600-level prefix numbers.
Now, in 2012, the School Leadership program is undergoing significant revisions under a NAU
President’s Innovation Grant. EDL faculty members have been working for almost two years to
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 1
redesign this program to reduce the overall number of credit hours from 36 hours to a 30 hour
program to make the program more attractive to potential candidates. The redesign is
intended to narrow the focus and core classes to only those courses that are most critical to the
acquisition of leadership skills and knowledge. This changes the focus of the degree and the
target audience to include individuals who do not plan to become principals at this point in
their career. The redesigned degree will enable individuals who are moving into leadership
positions within schools to gain valuable leadership skills. These positions may include, but are
not limited to; special education directors and chairs, instructional coaches, department chairs,
deans and teachers on special assignment. Specialization strands will be part of the coursework
so that students can specialize in their area of interest. Once the full redesign is finished and all
curriculum approval processes have been completed, the new program will be available online,
in hybrid format, and in person to will allow students to choose between three different tracks.
Program Description
The M.Ed. in Educational Leadership is currently a 36-hour program, with one specialization
area is School Leadership. Although designed and intended primarily for professionals working
in educational settings, this degree may also be appropriate for individuals looking to assume
leadership positions in other professions. Coursework leading to a master's degree is offered in
numerous locations throughout Arizona. Admission applications are processed throughout the
year, with no specified limit on the number of students accepted. No teaching experience is
required to apply to this program.
Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of the plan, the student will be able to:
Serve in leadership positions at the K-12 level which do not necessarily require State
administrator certification (examples may include, but are not limited to, teachers serving as a
department chair of an academic unit, leading curriculum initiatives, working with school and
community programs, etc.) Below are newly adopted specific outcomes the student, once
graduated, should meet:

Students understand and can collect and use data to identify school goals,
assess organizational effectiveness, and implement plans to achieve school
goals.

Students understand and can sustain a school culture and instructional program
conducive to student learning through collaboration, trust, and a personalized
learning environment with high expectations for students.
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 2

Students understand and can create and evaluate a comprehensive, rigorous, and
coherent curricular and instructional school program.

Students understand and can develop and supervise the instructional and
leadership capacity of school staff.

Students understand and can promote the most effective and appropriate
technologies to support teaching and learning in a school environment.

Students understand and can promote school-based policies and procedures that
protect the welfare and safety of students and staff within the school.

Students understand and can ensure teacher and organizational time
focuses on supporting high-quality school instruction and student learning.

Students understand and can collaborate with faculty and community
members by collecting and analyzing information pertinent to the
improvement of the school's educational environment.

Students understand and can mobilize community resources by promoting an
understanding, appreciation, and use of diverse cultural, social, and intellectual
resources within the school community.

Students understand and can respond to community interests and needs by
building and sustaining positive school relationships with families and caregivers.

Students understand and can respond to community interests and needs by
building and sustaining productive school relationships with community partners.

Students understand and can act with integrity and fairness to ensure a school
system of accountability for every student's academic and social success.

Students understand and can model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice,
transparency, and ethical behavior as related to their roles within the school.

Students understand and can safeguard the values of democracy, equity, and
diversity within the school.

Students understand and can evaluate the potential moral and legal consequences
of decision-making in the school.

Students understand and can promote social justice within the school to ensure
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 3
that individual student needs inform all aspects of schooling.

Students understand and can anticipate and assess emerging trends and
initiatives in order to adapt school-based leadership strategies.

Students will further their skills and knowledge base per the area of
“specialization” they select.
This emphasis requires 36 hours of coursework, as follows:
 12 hours of required foundations courses (including a research course and a course in
school law)
 15 hours of required leadership skills development courses
 9 hours of specialization electives
These hours are obtained through the following courses, as outlined in the program of study:
FOUNDATIONS: (12 semester hours)
EDR 610 Introduction to Research
EDF 630 or EDL 622 Foundations of Ed. Law or Legal Aspects of Sch. Admin
2 EDF electives (6 hours) chosen from the following:
EDF 670 Educational Philosophy
EDF 671 History of American Education
EDF 672 Comparative Education
EDF 673 International Education
EDF 677 Educational Sociology
EDL 623 Publicity and Politics of Education
LEADERSHIP SKILL DEVELOPMENT: (15 semester hours) to be taken sequentially
EDL 600 Leadership Skills
EDL 630 Leadership Development [prerequisite EDL 600]
EDL 650 Critical Issues in Educational Leadership [no prerequisite]
EDL 660 Action Learning Modules [prerequisite EDL 600/630]
EDL 680 Masters Seminar (culminating experience) [prerequisite EDL 600/630/660]
SPECIALIZATION ELECTIVES: (9 semester hours)
One elective from any of the Teaching & Learning courses, i.e., an ECI class (EDL 625 or
EDL 662 may be substituted for the T&L requirement); one elective from the remaining
leadership knowledge domain courses (EDL 622, 623, 625, 627, 629, 732, 635, 737, 738, or
662); one elective from the student's area of specialization. The Education Specialization
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 4
class must be any 600-level or higher NAU Education course unless you have prior written
approval from the EDL department chair.
Background Information
Enrollment:
The vast majority of students in the Educational Leadership Master’s Degree program are
located in communities around the state of Arizona. These students work full time in public,
charter and private school while completing courses at extend campus facilities or on-line. Very
few students are full time graduate students. The decline in enrollment since 2006 can be
attributed to a variety of factors, yet most evident are: economic factors for both students and
school districts. Educators at the beginning of their career are the individuals who usually
enroll in master’s degree programs. These early career professional are also the individuals are
most likely to receive reduction in force notification as districts are forced to downsize. Early
career educators have not been willing to commit to the expense of a master’s degree not
knowing if the will have a job in their school district in the future. As school district budgets
have shrunk, so have corresponding funds available to support students taking master’s degree
courses.
Number of Candidates Enrolled
Enrollment Trend for the M.Ed. in
Educational Leadership: School Leadership
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
FY 04
FY 05
FY 06
FY 07
FY 08
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
Unduplicated
3
1
1
206
172
148
136
109
95
Duplicated
3
181
379
287
228
180
154
104
*Duplicated counts were obtained from PAIR data on programs. Unduplicated counts were obtained by using PAIR data for the fall term of each
academic year. Unduplicated count was not available for FY 12.
Graduation Rates
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 5
School Leadership Degrees Awarded by Location (PAIR data, duplicated count)
Degree Awarded
FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12
Community Campuses
1
1
125
168
93
66
47
55
49
Flagstaff
2
4
6
3
1
3
2
Online
0
2
4
4
1
0
0
Yuma
15
6
5
1
1
0
0
TOTAL
1
1
142
180
108
74
50
58
51
Enrollment Rates by Gender & Program Diversity
Number of Enrolled School Leadership Students by Gender (PAIR data, unduplicated count)
Gender
Female
FY 04
3
FY 05
0
FY 06
(100%)
Male
TOTAL
0
3
FY 07
127
FY 08
112
FY 09
108
FY 10
94
FY 11
81
FY 12
61
(62%)
(65%
(73%)
(69%)
(74%)
(73%)
1
1
79
60
40
42
28
22
(100%
)
(100%)
(38%)
(35%)
(27%)
(31%)
(26%)
(27%)
1
1
206
172
148
136
109
83*
*FY 11 Gender data only includes students in the M.Ed., excluding those in the “preparation”
track. The total (83) is slightly lower than the total for FY Ethnicity/Race data, which does
include those candidates in both the M.Ed. track and the “preparation” track.
Enrolled School Leadership Students by Race/Ethnicity (PAIR data, unduplicated count)
Race /
Ethnicity
African
American
Asian
American
Hispanic
Native
American
White
FY 04
FY 05
FY 06
FY 07
FY 08
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
9
9
5
8
2
11
(4%)
(6%)
(3%)
(6%)
(2%)
(12%)
3
3
3
8
5
2
(1%)
(1%)
(2%)
(6%)
(5%)
(2%)
1
1
30
13
19
20
13
12
(100%)
(100%
)
(15%)
(8%)
(14%)
(15%)
(12%)
(13%)
5
7
2
8
7
4
(2%)
(4%)
(1%)
(6%)
(6%)
(4%)
3
151
138
112
86
76
63
(100%)
(75%)
(80%)
(76%)
(62%)
(70%)
(66%)
Other/Not
Specified
Two or more
International
7
2
2
2
2
1
(3%)
(1%)
(1%)
(5%)
(2%)
(1%)(
4
3
2
(3%)
(3%)
(2%)
109
95
1
(>1%)
TOTAL
3
1
1
206
172
148
136
As is evident in the data above, the School Leadership has seen a steady decline in student
numbers over the past few years. Department faculty are aware of this and have been thinking
about ways to make the program more relevant for today’s educational needs. Hence, the EDL
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 6
department applied for the President’s Innovation Grant funding to support a major revision of
this particular degree path.
Relationship to NAU’s mission and strategic goals
The M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School Leadership addresses the values, mission and
strategic goals of NAU. The program is designed to prepare professionals to assume leadership
roles in K-12 educational settings in Arizona, in the western region, nationally, and globally. One
area of emphasis in this program is on creating a learning-centered approach in all courses
(NAU Goal 1 Learner-Centered University) through the variety of delivery methods used in the
program, a focus on instructional practices geared to adult learners, and a program tailored to
working professionals. Rigorous, high-quality program experiences focus on student success by
placing the learner at the center of its program. To address the NAU Goal 2 (Increased access to
higher education), the School Leadership program uses available technologies to ensure that
the program is of high quality and accessible to students throughout Arizona and beyond the
state borders, and by making the program affordable and feasible to students living in diverse
communities and with various career demands. There is also a major emphasis within the
program on working with underserved populations, particularly Native Americans and Hispanics
(NAU Goal 6 Commitment to Native Americans).
In addition to a close articulation with the NAU mission and goals, the program is aligned with
and supports the strategic plan of the College of Education, specifically Goals 1, 4, 5 and 7. By
creating a program that develops teacher-leaders, the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School
Leadership creates a cadre of leaders across the state serving in K-12 settings. This cadre
positions NAU as a leader in preparing high quality professionals serving our schools (CoE Goal
1 Leadership in Education in Arizona). The program has developed methods of course delivery
to reach out to educators serving rural and reservation-based programs in Arizona, helping the
college to be seen as a national leading college of education serving Hispanic/Latino(a)
candidates (CoE Goal 5 Become a national leader in serving Native American students). Perhaps
most significantly, the program is designed to address leadership broadly defined to include
traditional leaders (principals) and other forms of leadership such as teacher-leaders,
curriculum specialists, and mentor/coaches as leaders.
Program quality
The EDL faculty attempt to maintain a high standard of program quality in the School
Leadership program, but unfortunately, some aspects of program delivery are not within our
control. As the program moved further off campus through distance delivery initiatives, fulltime tenure track faculty slowly lost control over aspects of the program (including, for
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 7
example, the hiring of part-time instructors, the syllabi that were used for courses, course
materials and pedagogies, and the standards expected of students in the courses). Over the
past few years, EDL faculty have been deeply concerned about this and have had many
conversations about how to best rectify this situation. We have, for example, assigned lead
faculty to each of the courses, developed standard syllabi that are distributed to part-time
instructors, and mentored part-time instructors on the standard syllabi and course
expectations. We feel that some of these efforts have had an impact, but without some
commitment to support faculty time in these endeavors (i.e., through course releases or some
other compensation), we are unable to implement them to the extent we would like. The
program relies very heavily on part-time instructors to offer courses for this degree program.
On average, we have 99 part-time instructors (in addition to our 15 full-time faculty) teaching
EDF, EDL, and EDR courses across the state and 18 part-time instructors (in addition to 1 fulltime faculty member) teaching all CC/HE courses across the state.
Qualifications of Fulltime Faculty Teaching Course in the Program
M.Ed. In EDL K-12
Yrs
Teaching
Name
PhD/EdD
Med/MA
BA/BS
Angelina Castagno
PhD EdPol
M.Ed. EdPol
B.A. Phil
0
0
6
Frances Riemer
PhD Ed Antrho
M.S. SecEd
B.S. SecEd
4
1
24
Gary Emanuel
DA
MA
BS
4
18
18
Gerald Wood
PhD InstrLdr
M.Ed/EDL
B.S.Forsrv
6
Guy Senese
SecEd-Soc
Phil
4
Ishmael Munene
PhD/EdPol
PhD
Admin/Policy
M.Ed/Intl
BS SecEng
0.5
Karyn Blair
EdD
M.Ed Sec
BS PE
12
19
4
Mary Culver
EdD EDL
M.A. C&I
B.S. StatHx
9
1
8
Michael Schwanenberger
EdD EDL
M.Ed Sec
BS PE
10
27
4
Mary Dereshiwsky
PhD BusAdmin
M.S. Acct
0
0
21
Ric Wiggall
EdD EdAdmin
M.A. Sec
B.S. Educ
B.S.
Chem&Bio
8
18
13
William Wright
EdD EdLdr
M.A.
B.A.
5
23
17
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Oth K-12
Yrs HEd
6
2
24
16
Page 8
Walter Delecki
PhD EdAdmin
M.A.Ed.
Admin
BBA
Fin/Econ
3
20
12
Total
Average
65.5
5.0
129.0
9.9
173.0
13.3
The table below indicates faculty teaching core courses:
EDL Full-Time
Core Faculty
Angelina Castagno
Frances Riemer
Gary Emanuel
Gerald Wood
Guy Senese
Ishmael Munene
Karyn Blair
Mary Culver
Mary Dereshiwsky
Ric Wiggall
William Wright
Rank
Associate Professor
Professor
Associate Professor
Associate Professor
Professor
Associate Professor
Clinical Asst Prof
Clinical Associate Professor
Professor
Associate Professor
Professor
Department Courses Taught/Lead Faculty
Assigned
EDF 677
EDF 677
EDF 671, EDL 623
EDF 677
EDF 670
EDR 610, EDF 672, 673
EDL 600, 650
EDL 630
EDR 610
EDL 680
EDL660
Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness and Innovation
Course evaluations for M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School Leadership classes in the most
recent academic year (2011-2102) are depicted in the chart below (5 point Likert scale; 5 is
Outstanding; 4 is Very Good). The instrument used to complete course ratings use a Likert-like 5
point scale where a rating of five is defined as Outstanding, a rating of three is Satisfactory, and
a rating of one is deemed to be Unsatisfactory. While the course evaluation instrument samples
a variety instructional design, instructional delivery, course management and instructor
variables, two items were extracted as the best indicators of course quality: The extent to
which candidates perceived that the course increased their knowledge and the degree to which
the course was considered to be worthwhile. Reviewing the results of courses in the program
during this review period, instructors and the overall course content are evaluated as very good
to outstanding. Students appear to be very satisfied with the instruction in the Masters in
Secondary Education program. The response rate from students averages about the high 30%
to mid-40% range. Low student response rate is a concern since COE went to electronic
methods of rating professors.
The chair and assistant chair of the educational Leadership department review both full and
part-time faculty student course rating on a semester basis. Course ratings over 4.0 are
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 9
generally considered acceptable. Ratings over 4.5 are general considered outstanding. A
review of the master’s degree courses listed indicates improvement required in EDR 610 (one
of the beginning courses in the program which many students find difficult), EDF 672 (taught
infrequently) and EDL 660 (taught mainly by part-time faculty). Courses considered outstanding
by student reviews include EDL 622, EDL 671 and EDL 680. We are working on ways to improve
response rates to be 50% as a minimum. EDL 630 realized a higher than average level of
student satisfaction. An Emeritus faculty member has been teaching EDL for several years and
his methodology of instruction and general wealth of experience has led to this high level of
satisfaction in EDL 630. EDR 610 and EDL 660 have received less than the average level of
student satisfaction. EDR 610 is often a master’s student’s first experience with an online
course. Additionally, EDR 610 has the highest number of classes offered each semester by parttime instructors. The EDL department will be discussing means of raising student satisfaction in
EDR 610 and EDL 660 through an analysis of available data and then apply intervention
strategies. EDL 660 is primarily taught by part-time faculty and it is a course that is applied to
other degree programs beyond M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School Leadership: k-12
Emphasis.
FOUNDATIONS
Course Number and Title
EDR 610 Introduction to Research
Sections
Taught
2011-12
28
Response
Rate
(range)
50%
Increased
Knowledge
Course
Worthwhile
3.80
3.71
4.25
4.23
4.59
4.19
4.24
4.09
4.67
4.56
3.96
3.91
Not Taught in
2011-12
4.43
Not Taught
in 2011-12
4.32
Response
Rate
(range)
Increased
Knowledge
Course
Worthwhile
50%
4.37
4.25
4.31
4.40
(0-100%)
EDF 630 Foundations of Education Law
5
35%
(6-52(%)
EDL 622 Legal Aspects of School
Administration
EDF 670 Philosophy of Education
13
40%
(0-73%)
8
31%
(0-56%)
EDF 671 History of American Education
8
52%
(0-100%)
EDF 672 Comparative Education
3
43%
(13-90%)
EDF 673 International Education
n/a
n/a%
(%)
EDF 677 Education Sociology
4
48%
(33-67%)
EDL 623 Publicity and Politics of Education
Course Number and Title
Sections
Taught
2011-12
EDL 600 Leadership Skills
18
LEADERSHIP SKILL DEVELOPMENT
(11-100%)
EDL 630 Leadership Development
7
80%
(33-100%)
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 10
EDL 650 Critical Issues in Educational
Leadership
EDL 660 Action Learning Modules
12
35%
4.21
4.13
3.76
3.60
4.63
4.63
(0-57%)
5
42%
(30-57%)
EDL 680 Master’s Seminar
8
45%
(33-60%)
Assessment of Student Learning/Success
Student learning outcomes and success are mainly determined by course grades. Educational
Leadership Constituents Council (ELCC) standards serve as the cornerstone of all of our EDL
master’s degree programs. Achievement of course objectives relating to ELCC standards serve
as the basis for student grades. Additionally, specific courses require field work experience of
15 hours which students log as an assignment for a portion of their grade.
Mentoring and Research Activity of Graduate Students
One important strength of the Educational Leadership department is the mentor/faculty
relationship which is established with each student individually. Faculty members who teach in
the Educational Leadership department (both full-time and part-time) have been or currently
are practicing school and leaders. They are current and are leading by example. Faculty
members are able to blend the theoretical concepts of leadership into practical application
activities for students. Faculty members are located throughout the state so that students have
ample opportunities to access faculty who serve as their mentors. Faculty mentors are able to
assist students with action research (predominately) projects that are occurring in their schools
and school districts.
Faculty contributions:
Faculty teaching in the School Leadership program are very active in the profession, in our local
communities, and nationally. For a list of recent faculty contributions, please see the appendix.
EDL Core Faculty Publications and Presentations, 2003-2012
EDL Core
Faculty
Publications
Core Faculty
2003-2012 Authored Book
Journal
Conference
Appendix H
Books
Chapters Publications Presentations
n= 14
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
22
39
122
249
Page 11
During the time period 2003 through 2012 the fourteen Educational Leadership core faculty authored 22
books, 39 book chapters, 122 journal publications, and 249 conference presentations (international,
national, state, regional, and local). These are summarized above and can be found in Appendices H,
Core Faculty Publications and Core Faculty Presentations. We consider these numbers to be a
substantial contribution to the field of educational leadership. See the Appendices file for details on
faculty scholarship.
Strategic plans for the future:
Students
As mentioned above, the EDL faculty members are currently in the process of reworking this
degree entirely. Our ability to move ahead with this will largely depend on approval of
President’s Innovation Grant funds from the president’s office. We hope this effort will be
approved so that we can develop a program that is more responsive to the current economic
situation and student and community needs. The new program would see a reduction in
required credit hours, more opportunities to obtain the degree online, and more relevant
degree paths from which students may choose and thus, appeal to a larger student market.
Faculty/Staff
1. The EDL department will be discussing means of raising student satisfaction in EDR 610
and EDL 660 through an analysis of available data and then apply intervention
strategies. EDL 660 is primarily taught by part-time faculty and it is a course that is
applied to other degree programs beyond M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School
Leadership: k-12 Emphasis.
2. Future improvements for the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership: School Leadership K-12
Emphasis Program will include addressing faculty/staff course evaluation (student
satisfaction), program enhancements, and program delivery system.
3. It concerns the EDL faculty that, at the present, the majority of 600 level classes are
taught by part-time faculty due to the limited number of fulltime faculty available. The
EDL Department would like recoup the faculty positions it has lost due to retirements,
resignations, and re-assignments.
4. Although EDL administration annually reviews the “course evaluations” of each parttime instructor and approves or denies continued employment of all PT instructors, it is
recommended that a more formal procedure be established which could also confirm
that the instructor is using the standard syllabus for the course they are teaching. The
department is also interested in implementing a means of measuring the effectiveness
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 12
of part-time instructors in assisting students reach mastery levels of course learning
outcomes through a reliable assessment process.
Program
1. The EDL Department will be redesigning the M.Ed. in EDL – School Leadership: K-12
Emphasis to reduce the overall number of credit hours from 36 hours to a 30 hour
program to make the program more attractive to potential candidates. The redesign
involves changing the focus of the degree and the target audience to include individuals
who do not plan to become principals at this point in their career, but seek a leadership
position in their specific area of specialization. This degree will provide students with
focused essential leadership skills and knowledge. This degree program will replace the
existing M.Ed. in EDL – School Leadership K-12 Emphasis and will be referred to as
Master’s Degree in Educational Leadership: Instructional Leadership K-12 Emphasis.
2. Since the last review of Fall 2002, program standards established by the Educational
Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) have periodically been revised and in turn the
EDL department has work diligently to insure that the learning outcomes, as stated in
the departments standard syllabi, have reflected those ELCC standards in the core
courses. Revisions to standard syllabi align with the current ELCC standards and are
posted on the department’s web page. It is recommended that a college wide “web
master” position be established permanently in order to help facilitate ongoing changes
of the EDL Department web page.
Delivery System:
1. The expansion of online or hybrid classes should lead us to offering programs to
students without geographic border limitations. The EDL Department would like to
explore the possibility of offering programs to a larger market outside the state lines of
Arizona.
2. As the program expanded through distance delivery initiatives (EC), full-time tenure
track faculty slowly lost control over aspects of the program (including, for example, the
hiring of part-time instructors, the syllabi that were used for courses, course materials
and pedagogies, and the standards expected of students in the courses). Over the past
few years, EDL faculty has been deeply concerned about this, and has had many
conversations about how to best rectify this situation. As a result, the faculty has
volunteered to establish assignments of faculty to act as “lead faculty” to each of the
courses, developed standard syllabi that are distributed to part-time instructors, and
mentored part-time instructors on the standard syllabi and course expectations.
M.Ed. in Educational Leadership
Page 13