Prior to recommending each candidate for a Preliminary Administrative Services Credential, one or more persons responsible for the program determine on the basis of thoroughly documented evidence that each candidate has demonstrated a satisfactory performance on the full range of standards of candidate competence and performance in Standards 10 through 15 of Category III. Satisfactory performance is defined as achieving competence as expected for entry-level administrators. During the program, candidates are guided and coached on their performance in relation to the standards of candidate competence and performance using formative assessment processes. Verification of candidate competence is provided by a representative of the program sponsor and at least one field/clinical supervisor.
Program Planning Prompts:
The assessment includes two or more assessment methods such as performance, portfolio, presentation, research project, field-experience journal, work sample, interview, oral examination and written examination.
The Educational Leadership and Administration Program has developed course syllabi with signature assignments and embedded fieldwork which involve many different types of activities and assessments, all directly related to the work of a school leader. A few examples of the diverse types of assessment include those below. It is of note that these activities involve the candidate in a number of tasks that research points to as best practices for successful school leaders.
- Develop a profile of their school from various data sources (261 Signature Assignment 3)
- Design a solution to a case study involving special needs students and student discipline issues (261 Signature Assignment 4)
- Perform a classroom learning walk to gather data about curriculum and instruction at the site (272 Signature Assignment 2 and Embedded Fieldwork Assignment 2)
- Organize a formative assessment profile for a given school site (272 Signature Assignment 3)
- Gather data on personal leadership characteristics using a 360-Degree Feedback process (262 Signature Assignment 1a)
- Write a reflection paper on the results of the personal assessment (262 Signature Assignment 1b)
- Develop a personal vision statement (262 Signature Assignment 2)
- Review student achievement data websites and compare the achievement of the candidate’s school to two other schools (288 Signature Assignment 1)
- Prepare a program evaluation and present to the class (288 Signature Assignment 4)
- Examine the school site Tier 1, 2, and 3 responses to intervention and develop desired outcomes and next steps (274 Signature Assignment 1)
- Conduct an equity audit utilizing data from the school site (274 Signature Assignment 2)
- Perform a clinical supervision exercise with a teacher (263 Embedded Fieldwork Assignment 1)
- Develop a focused professional development plan (263 Signature Assignment 1)
- Complete a budget template for the school site (269 Embedded Fieldwork Assignment 3)
- Participate in an interview simulation for an entry-level administration position (269 Embedded Fieldwork Assignment 4)
- Write a personnel discipline letter based on a case scenario (269 Signature Assignment 1)
- Prepare a capstone paper on the current state and desired state of your site (269 Signature Assignment 4)
- The systematic procedures that govern the summative assessment include a defensible process and criteria, such as rubrics, for evaluating performance, an appeal process, and a procedure for candidates to repeat portions of the assessment as needed.
The summative assessment of candidates involves four major activities:
1) The candidate prepares a personal Statement of Philosophy, a resume, and writes to a timed prompt to a practicum (269 Signature Assignment 3).
2) The candidate prepares a capstone paper on the current state and desired state of her/his site (269 Signature Assignment 4)
3) The candidate participates in an interview simulation for an entry-level administration position with a current school administrator, usually from the central office (superintendent or assistant superintendent) (269 Embedded Fieldwork Assignment 4)
4) The candidate’s portfolio is presented for review by the district mentor and the university supervisor.
Each candidate’s work is reviewed each semester by the instructor of each course in which embedded fieldwork and signature assignments take place. Additional ongoing review takes place by the district mentor. The faculty advisor (university supervisor) reviews the portfolio each semester. The embedded fieldwork and signature assignments contain a number of rubrics and criteria lists for the candidate to ensure that her/his work is of the caliber necessary. The instructor utilizes these same criteria and rubrics in assigning grades while providing additional feedback to any candidate who needs to repeat portions or all of any activity.
When the candidate completes the program, the portfolio is revised for the fifth time, thus it is not the first time that the candidate and candidate’s supervisors have been through a review of work completed. The Descriptions of Practice (See Appendix 13) are used by the candidate and the supervisor to determine the level of practice displayed by the candidate at various points in the program and at the end of the program.
The candidate who does not successfully meet all standards will develop a written plan with her/his university advisor for candidate acquisition and demonstration of competency necessary to satisfy any and all standards not met and submit the plan to the Program Appeal Committee (consisting of two faculty members and a representative from the district. No more than one of the judges who assessed the candidate’s performance may serve on the Program Appeal Committee). Upon successful completion of the plan and demonstration of performance, the Program Appeal Committee will provide written documentation verifying successful completion of the standard(s).
Additionally, any candidate who does not satisfactorily pass the defense of her/his portfolio may appeal in writing to the program coordinator. The program coordinator will review the case with two other program faculty members and the district mentor. A response will be given to the candidate within one week. If the candidate is not satisfied with the decision of the Program Appeal Committee, the candidate may appeal in writing to the Dean of the Kremen School of Education and Human Development, using the established university protocol for appeals.
The program sponsor ensures that thorough records of each candidate’s performance in the summative assessment are maintained.
The Program Coordinator maintains copies of the results of the summative assessment on file for a period of five years. Upon completion of the program, candidates must turn in a copy to the program of the Candidate Portfolio for Administrative Field Experience/Administrative Internship and Signature Assignments (Appendix 2) with copies of the four semester reviews and the portfolio (summative) review.
The program staff periodically evaluates the quality, fairness and effectiveness of assessment practices and uses assessment data as one source of information about the quality of the preparation program.
The embedded fieldwork activities and signature assignments have been designed specifically to be used in candidate AND program assessment. When all courses are in place in this revised program (by the end of the next semester), the assessment coordinator and the program coordinator will gather data on a regular basis to analyze as program faculty and to make necessary revisions. At the same time, selected results will be a regular part of the bienniel report to the CTC and will be available at any time to members of the CTC for their review.