February 2012- Vol.3 No.2

   

Carolyn Rogers, Faculty Chair, P-12 Leadership & Licensure Programs                      

 

Melissa McIntyre, Faculty Lead, LEA     

         Carol Pasanen, Faculty Lead, SEL  

Phil Corkill, Core Faculty, LEA                            Doug DeWitt, Core Faculty, C&I   
  Ted Ray, Core Faculty, LEA                                  Sam Song, Core Faculty, C&I 
Skot Beazley, Faculty Lead, C&I                         

  

 

Message From Dr. Carolyn Rogers, LEAD Faculty Chair

Welcome P-12 Leadership Faculty:

It is with pride that I offer another edition of the Leadership and Licensure Programs LEAD newsletter. I am sure you know that the Leadership and Licensure programs offer degrees in Curriculum & Instruction (C&I), Special Education Leadership (SEL), and Leadership in Educational Administration (LEA) at the Master's, Education Specialist (C&I and LEA only) and Doctoral levels. I am sure you know that the recent graduates of the program have gone on to become faculty members, district and school administrators, authors and the like. I am also sure that you know that behind each of these exceptional learners are quality faculty members with exceptional experiences, knowledge and skills who put their hearts into ensuring each learner has a quality experience. An example of your high level of engagement is shown on the recent SWOT analysis that each of you had the opportunity to add your thoughts and ideas. Pease take a look, as I am sure your thoughtful analysis of our programs will guide us into the future.

A special thank you to all of the contributors!

 

 

 


STRENGTHS:

  1. Caring faculty is committed to learners and to providing with excellent courseroom experiences.

  2. These are comprehensive programs that cover all the areas needed by educational leaders, generally at a high level.

  3. Abundance of support and resources for learners

  4. Faculty that cares, is highly engaged in the profession, and is VERY knowledgeable at the practitioner level.

  5. We have two different emphases to prepare our learners for the principal and superintendent track.

  6. Capacity to reach students who are in the educational system and therefore, can take the learning and put it into practice.

  7. Capella's initial training for faculty to learn online skills

  8. Blackboard discussion rubric used in most courses

  9. Curriculum development system for courses aligned with assessments

  10. Faculty personalization of learning via discussions

  11. LEA focus on learner engagement early in the course

  12. Student services and support offered online (faculty and advisors

  13. Courseroom resources for learners and facult

  14. Scholar-practitioner philosophy embedded into resources

  15. Colloquia sessions for face-to-face learner support from faculty and staff

  16. Knowledgeable Faculty

  17. Faculty with Experience in the Field—some who are currently practicing directors of special education

  18. Faculty with a Blend of Skills—mentoring, course development, teaching, NCATE/SPA reports, monitor professional journals

  19. Passion for Specialization—faculty who are dedicated to the ongoing improvement of special education services in P-12 schools

  20. Supportive Culture among Faculty

WEAKNESSES:

  1. Colloquium Scale—to deliver optimal experience and to build relationships, we should examine our model to improve learner experiences during our residencies. Specifically, we should consider an alternative to the large room presentations; rather than having 6 faculty in a large room with 70-90 learners, divide the learners into 6 smaller groups of 10-15, have one instructor present to each small group. Such a model would enhance learner experience through a more intimate venue for interaction and relationship building.

  2. Dissertation Mentoring—disparities in levels of service provided to dissertation mentees by mentors and committee members.

  3. Professional Learning for Faculty—in order to better maintain connections with current issues and perspectives, we should consider greater investment in professional development opportunities. Core faculty/leadership must attend annual conferences of our major professional organizations.

  4. Focus or Brand for our leadership programs to establish Capella as a unique educational opportunity that matters, makes a difference in our nations educational outcomes.

  5. There should be some kind of mandatory writing program for those learners who cannot write. I don't understand why we don't have one.

  6. A major weakness is the lack of "all faculty" doing the best they can with writing issues. I believe that if each faculty member would just require each staff person to "demand" that learners use spell check and grammar check in all their submissions/work...and then "be persistent" in their classrooms on the issue of writing...this would help. These learners are going to go through writing exercises in job interviews and many are not going to make it? We're all not perfect, but we need to be persistent!!!

  7. IRB and SMR are both killing us!! I am now having learners considering leaving Capella and going elsewhere because they are so disgusted with the processes and the unreasonable amount of time it takes to get these completed!

  8. A culture is starting to develop where the faculty is a necessary evil to the employees in the Capella tower. This is not always true, but is becoming more and more apparent.

  9. We are still using some courses for multiple programs, which does not fully allow the course to reflect the specific needs of the LEA specialization.

  10. Lack of overall unifying themes to distinguish our brand.

  11. Some staff not doing the job as expected

  12. Need for expanded staff training in online strategies and tools

  13. Lack of consistency in staff use of the discussion rubric

  14. Evidence that curriculum development process sometimes results in less than top quality courses

  15. Inconsistent use of discussion activities across all courses

  16. Too many learners fail to become engaged and productive learners

  17. Some students fail to access the Capella resources available

  18. Some students fail to learn how to successfully navigate the courseroom

  19. The scholar-practitioner philosophy is not consistently applied in practice

  20. Colloquium grading practices need review and improvement

  21. Size—the SEL specialization is smaller than the LEA and C&I specializations. The number of directors of special education compared to the number of other administrators is much smaller, so it is natural that this specialization is smaller as well. However, this does mean that some of the courses in the SEL specialization may be smaller on average than the others in the P-12 leadership courses.

  22. Mentoring needs in SEL are likely to grow in the next year; there may be a lack of qualified SEL mentors. Suggest bringing in new personnel who would work under a mentor only model.

  23. Faculty Nearing the End of their Careers—two or three of the SEL faculty are gradually decreasing their workloads as they move closer to retirement. Some of these people have written or revised several courses and have been the teaching stalwarts.

OPPORTUNITIES:

  1. We have opportunity to strengthen our faculty skills through commitment to providing professional development opportunities.

  2. We have opportunity to boost learner satisfaction through a new, more personalized Colloquium model (small sections of 10-15 learners with each faculty member, rather than 60-90 in one room with big-screen PowerPoint presentations and microphones).

  3. Consider instilling into all of our courses a common strand focused on addressing a national crisis in education: dropout prevention, graduation rates.

  4. We must strive to leverage the latest technologies to deliver our courses (e.g., iPad, iPhone, Kindle, Nook . . .)

  5. All of our leadership courses might be strengthened through addition of a unit/discussion/assignment focused on integration of technology.

  6. It would be good if the university targeted those states where we have little exposure.

  7. More direct targeting of Baby Boomers. Many are retiring and are going back to school to learn for self-efficacy rather than for employment reasons.

  8. Partnerships with school districts to provide enriched field experiences.

  9. To demonstrate that Capella is a value added educational experience

  10. Higher education is being severely criticized for not producing needed education reform...Capella could become a national leader in higher education by demonstrating needed reforms in addition to top quality programs and services in an online environment. The organization ACTA (American Council of Trustees and Alumni) recently issued a state-wide report card on Maine, having earlier done so in MN, and many areas of higher education improvement were identified, representing an opportunity for Capella. One idea: the National Malcolm Baldrige Program offers research-based standards for performance excellence.

  11. The growing national crisis in the educational achievement gap...Capella could implement personalized assessment of learners and customize follow-up so as to demonstrate learner achievement. We could be highlighting the strategies that work and then enforcing teaching standards so as to ensure learner success. Capella could show the way for all learners to be successful, but significant changes would need to be implemented. Still, few entities are as well positioned as is Capella to make a difference for education in our country.

  12. Need for state/national education leadership across the country...Capella could demonstrate expanded, bold leadership vision and organizational results. One example: the movie Superman--Capella could develop a leadership strategy for telling the truth about education system weaknesses and offering a set of standards that are so bold but also successful, because they're based on the research about what works. Another example: buying books for faculty groups to discuss, such as CLASS WARFARE by Steven Brill, a powerful story about education reform...failures and successes. National education leaders (Education Secretary Arne Duncan) would likely desire partners like Capella, but would require evidence of real education reform. The timing is right for national leadership by Capella, offering personalized learning and leadership for education. Another idea: sponsoring a charter school or developing a think tank support group for charter school ideas. Another idea: taking a public stance in support of pending legislation in MN, such as expansion of PSEO and reform of teacher tenure laws.

  13. Significant learner language arts skills deficiencies...Capella could implement program redesign so as to achieve excellence in speaking, writing, listening, reading/analyzing skills of learners. Many of our learners have not been participants in quality education systems. We have the capacity to really help each learner to achieve the skills needed, to implement the scholar-practitioner model with lots of faculty support. We could develop customized intervention programs and follow-up tailored to learners at risk. If Capella refuses to accept failure, this will lead our systems to higher accountability and learners will achieve.

  14. Turning tragedy into opportunity...such as "adopting" the young MN high school student recently paralyzed in a hockey accident and offering him a four-year scholarship at Capella...so as to put a personal and caring face on Capella in the community and make a HUGE difference in the life of one person, in the belief that anyone can achieve educational excellence at Capella! This young man's story is so compelling...what a difference Capella could make in his life, and motivate others by our example in reaching out to one young man who has experienced a personal tragedy.

  15. SEL EdS Program—providing this program would maintain the numbers in the required courses including the internship courses and would meet the licensure requirements for directors of special education.

  16. SEL Masters--SEL faculty also see the possibility of an SEL Masters program which would also meet licensing requirements in many states.

  17. Qualified Faculty—continue to recruit experienced special education leaders who will take this program into the future—to fill all roles: mentoring, teaching, course development, etc.

  18. LEA and C&I Learners—encourage to take more SEL courses as electives, especially in light of necessity of increased student achievement for all students.

  19. Work closely with the special education teaching program to transition learners from this Masters in special education to the PhD SEL program.

  20. Attend CEC and CASE conference to recruit new learners.

THREATS:

  1. We continue to face the threat of enrollment decline due to growing competition in the online learning world. We must continue to broaden our client base through targeted advertising designed to highlight the accomplishments of Capella graduates, and we must continue to seek innovation in our program delivery model.

  2. We've picked the low hanging fruit. Now we need to show value added to get students.

  3. Learner(s) not aware that their respective state does not accept administrative certification from Capella.

  4. Losing sight that it is the learners who count and the faculty who are closest to them and have a beat on where the learners are and what needs to be done. It seems like more and more, faculty input and opinions are not only ignored, but just not wanted at all. (in reference to SMR, IRB and Colloquia)

  5. Reacting to accrediting guidelines in individual states, which is causing us to lose learners.

  6. Lack of students who see the value add of this Capella experience and therefore, find it not a financial option.

  7. Monetary impact of federal rules changes for online entities--loss of some funding and public trust

  8. Other online entities' hiring practices and compensation packages may result in loss of Capella staff.

  9. The external Capella board resistance to implementing university requests for changes in policies and practices (i.e., open enrollment and staff compensation system)

  10. Public perception that shareholder profit is more important than meeting the needs of at risk learners currently enrolled in programs

  11. Size of Specialization—if numbers in the SEL specialization remain stable or decrease, the natural fear is that the specialization will cease to exist.

  12. SMR/IRB—as the bar has been raised for mentees in their dissertation process, the skill level for both the mentor and mentees must be increased as well. It is imperative that mentors be appropriately trained to understand the new requirements. Learners must also have the necessary writing and research skills to be able to successfully complete their dissertation journeys. If learners do not experience success with their dissertations, more may drop their program.

  13. Dissertation Committee Members—the role of and compensation for the dissertation committee members need greater clarification. Some committee members do not give substantive feedback in a timely fashion and seem frustrated with being asked to review proposals more than once. Others give feedback and want to see the proposal again, but the mentor forwards the proposals to the School of Education without sending the proposal back to committee members for “another look”. Also, if committee members are not going to be involved in the dissertation process until after the learners complete milestone 3, then committee members should not be assigned until that point.

Message from the editor . . .

Hello again, all! Here's our February 2012 news. Our monthly newsletter includes our  faculty meeting minutes and other useful information and  resources. Please send me any news about yourself or your learners for upcoming issues.

 

Our newsletters are intended to provide:

  •   Faculty Meeting Minutes

  •   News About LEAD Faculty

  •   News About LEAD Learners

  •   Any Other Important News, Updates, Information

  •   Just For Fun (Anything!)
     

Please be reminded to visit our LEAD Talking Points BLOG. http://capellalead.blogspot.com

We are hoping for 100% participation by all LEAD faculty--please take a few moments to join the conversations about important challenges and issues relevant to our work as we prepare educators to lead their schools. And, should you encounter any technical difficulties as you attempt to join the blog, please let me know, and I'll try to assist.

 

 

Ted Ray, Editor ● 910.988.1620 ● ted.ray@capella.edu

NCATE SPA Program Recognition with no conditions - ELCC for District Level : PhD & EdS

We received notification from NCATE that all conditions were removed from the EdS & PhD district level programs. We are now fully recognized by ELCC for our Education Leadership Programs at both the District and Building levels. This is an amazing accomplishment and a big deal!

Evangeline Anoka - Teacher of the Year!

Evangeline Anoka, one of Dr Doug DeWitt's mentees, was recently named Teacher of the Year by the DeKalb County School System in Georgia. Congratulations Evangeline! Evangeline teaches kindergarten at Woodward Elementary School in Atlanta.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Learning Is Not Done

by Dr. Randall Sampson

Graduating from Capella University is not the final step of the journey, it is the initial step. The great relationships built on a dissertation committee has a long lasting effect for a Capella graduate. Currently my former mentor and committee members still advise me and provide the application of leadership skills required to make the critical changes in the world of educational reform. Former dissertation advisors Drs. Rogers, Corkill and Hoffman all advise me when I call or even when I don't call. As I conduct educational reform work in Detroit, it has become apparent that leaning on the best people is what will help get he job done. So, I am always able to contact my mentors for strategic advise and support. Leadership is not a task done by one, but a task that requires all to be involved. Capella provides that leadership support system beyond the virtual classroom.
 
 

Ignite Your Passion: Leveraging Knowledge To Make A World Of Difference
 

 

by Charles Tiffin, PhD
Provost, Capella University

 

Every day, we see story after story about job loss, celebrity scandals, unrest in the Middle East, brawls on the professional basketball court, and high profile murder cases. Sometimes it's surprising that people haven't stopped listening all together.

And yet there is so much good in the world--we just need to start talking about it. I'm sure you see it around you every day, and so do I.

At Capella University, we're in the enviable position of having daily encounters with people who are committed to gaining the knowledge they need to make a difference in the communities around them. It's happening in our schools, our health care system, and our businesses.

 

I applaud The Huffington Post for launching the Good News section of this website, and we're proud to be a sponsor. I look forward to reading international, national, and very personal stories about the positive activities that are happening around us. We're eager to shine a spotlight on people who are transforming the education of young people like Lerah Lee, who's implementing early childhood education programs that will close the achievement gap in Charleston County schools; Rebecca Souza, who's using her knowledge in public health to create an education program for use by African American churches in her community; and Heidi Coldagelli, who makes the most out of her business education to help others make the most of their potential.

Fresh thinking, energy, and vision are being used to tackle some of the most challenging problems we face. Having this place to share ideas and successes offers the opportunity to build momentum toward some remarkable achievements. And that's good news for all of us.


Click here to read the rest of the article

P-12 LLP Faculty Meeting Minutes - February 14, 2012

Attendees:      AM Meeting: Skot Beazley, Claire Boyce, Bill Brown, Carol Burnworth, Phil Corkill, Linda Crawford, Dennis Flood, Donna Flood, Lisa Garcia, Adrienne Gibson, DeArmas Graham, Patricia Guillory, Steve Hinshaw, Carol Holzberg, Jerry Horgen, Dave Ibarra, Salha Jeizan, Cassandra Jenkins, Amy Kuo-Newhouse, Melissa McIntyre, Steve O’Brien, Bob Pohl, Sheldon Pride, Ted Ray, Linda Rodgers, Alma Rodriguez, Debbie Schreiner, Irene Singletary, Sue Slater, Hongzhaun Song, Laura Trujillo-Jenks, Phyllis Wilson, Bill Wold


PM Meeting: Candace Adams, Doug DeWitt, Ron Dougall, Deb Gilbert Scott Hollinger, Carol Holzberg, Michael Jazzar, Carol Pasanen, Carol Perez, Chris Stabile, Amy Williamson, Marc Boston, Mary Ann Nelson, Kathy Mondell

 

Accreditation

  • ELCC Spa-District Leadership
    We received confirmation from NCATE that our ELCC SPA for our district leadership emphasis has been approved as Recognized with no conditions.
  • GAPSC Visit
    Preparing for our GAPSC visit, representatives will not come to Minneapolis; instead it will be an electronic visit. Dr. Rogers, Corkill, McIntyre will go to Minneapolis to coordinate calls Mar 4-7. We are trying to find faculty and partners to participate in the interviews with the GAPSC representatives. If we’ve not contacted you and you’re aware of a learner who would be good to engage in interviews, please let Melissa know (grads or current learners). We are also working with site supervisors who will be asked to participate. We want to be sure we have more than enough to be interviewed. Please share with Melissa or Dr. Corkill site supervisor names you’d like to add to the interview list. For those of you who have been invited to participate, we will have a meeting for an overview, including times of interviews and general ideas of areas to consider in advance of the interview.

Q2 Updates

  • Course Assignments
    The first set of assignment spreadsheet shows pretty typical enrollment. There aren’t a lot of learners enrolled yet, but we plan to do initial course assignments by 20th of this month, then as enrollment increases and we need added sections, we’ll make additional course assignments. If you are interested in teaching a course and we’re not aware of it please let Melissa know. If any changes in work obligations or that you’ll be traveling and unavailable to teach, please let Melissa know. We have a few faculty who have requested mentor only status.
    Faculty center on i-Guide is another place you can find your workload units and assignments. Here’s a direct link to access faculty center (you’ll have to log on with your user name and password):     https://campus.capella.edu/web/faculty/faculty-center?deepLink=true
     
  • Mentor Only Positions
    We need mentors. If you’d like to mentor and not teach, please let Melissa, Skot or Carolyn know. This quarter we’ve already made assignments. Skot says now we made assignments to all who have workload capacity for mentor and committee assignments, 52 mentees and 120 additional committee assignments has gone to compsdiss support as of yesterday; most of those learners will not be formally notified of their mentor committee member assign until after they pass comps (in the next couple of weeks). Once the workload is locked in, Skot will go back and identify faculty who have additional workload capacity and notify compsdiss support. Need all to step up if they are able.
     
  • LEAD Blog
    All faculty are encouraged to visit the LEAD Blog and weigh in on the topics/issues. If you have any problem using the BLOG, or if you would like Dr. Ray to post an article on your behalf, just let Ted know (    ted.ray@capella.edu). You can access our BLOG at http://capellalead.blogspot.com/
     
  • Courseroom 3
    We will be moving to courseroom 3. Previously we anticipated that training would be begin in Jan, that has changed for SOE. SOHR is still working through some issues; after those are worked out, we’ll begin training to prepare for rollout for SOE. We should receive additional updates within the next few weeks and will have more info at our March meetings.
     
  • Survey of Professional Conduct
    Full time faculty are required to complete the survey to provide details of other work, presentations, publications, and educational information by February 20. Don’t’ forget to upload your updated CV at the end of the survey. The professional update process is required for accreditation purposes. Capella will be able to pull this information as needed for accreditation. Be sure to name your CV file as instructed in the email: Last name, first name, SOE, and 2012 (e.g. RayTedSOE2012.doc). Adjuncts and part-time are not required to do this, only full time faculty

Course Development

  • ED8007 Pilot
    We have been invited to participate in an ED8007 pilot. ED8007 is the first course for new learners in any P-12 program. We had our first meeting yesterday with Carolyn, Melissa, & Ted. Intent is to keep more learners in our program. Currently, a significant number of new learners who enter first course either drop the course or do not continue with other courses after ED8007. We are looking for ways to improve the course to enrich learners’ experiences, engage them and keep them in the program. We need feedback from instructors who have taught the course, including Carol Pasanen who worked on the last revision. We are seeking feedback needed to help us decide how to proceed within the next 2-3 weeks. We plan to begin making changes for Q4 rollout. One potential strategy includes looking at assessments that can be used to assess student writing and provide feedback & remediation. Also, there is the possibility of adding TA’s to the course to improve the learner experience. Another consideration we talked about is being cognizant that now ED8007 is for all P-12 learners, even though we have others who are in teaching based program rather than leadership based programs, so we might not continue to have all in the same course. We’ll explore this as well and share decisions.  Carol Pasanen, has taught the course many times, added that the two biggest reason learners dropped out was culture shock of the work load, having to be there 3-5 times per week, thought they could just go in on weekends and get it done; reason #2 is the academic writing. Also, they load themselves up with 2-3 courses, not realizing that balancing 2-3 courses at the same time is very difficult. Another question: do we need orientation content separate from specialization specific content?
     

  • 2013 Planned Course Development
    We are working to determine what courses need to be revised in 2013. Please let Melissa know any recommendations you have for revisions. Ideas discussed today—

  • It was suggested that we should have a course on School & Community Relations as schools work to keep students from leaving public schools to attend private or charter schools.
     
  • Consider a course to focus on theoretical foundations for our specialization to better prepare learners for dissertation; would be a new course rather than a course revision.

SWOT Analysis

 

We are looking for feedback from faculty in all three specializations that provides insights into how our specializations are performing by doing a SWOT analysis. We’ve gotten some feedback, but we wish to open the door to other faculty to provide their input. Below are points that were discussed about each specialization:
 

  • C&I
    • Dr. Beazley—intent is to send out to all C&I faculty to request their input. Also, he will send feedback to all core faculty.
    • There was a discussion about potential new models: could be new classes, new topics, we are really open—what can we do to provide learners with more “meat?” Do we need to change content of our course offerings?
    • Discussion of educational theory (all we currently get is constructivism, and learners don’t really understand it), need to weave the study of educational theory into several courses.
    • Donna Flood noted that neuro-education has taken on weight in education; she would like to see us support that field in some way (courses about neuro-education and the brain).
    • Adrienne Gibson—in C&I we are missing reference to online instruction; it is so common now not only in higher ed, but also in middle, secondary, and elementary. Capella’s current focus is on developing online course, rather than on online instruction.
    • Michael Jazzar thinks our C&I program is one of the very few accredited programs in the nations, which is one reason we continue to see enrollment increases. What we need to do in C&I is see what’s coming down the pike from legislations, jump ahead of that wave, make the necessary changes in our curriculum and continue to grow. Question: Capella has done quite a bit of advertising on television; has that been an enrollment catalyst? We’ve seen a dramatic increase in commercials and internet website ads. In regard to C&I, C&I has not gone through NCATE accreditation, but that is something that will be pursued in the next year or so. SEL was the first of our specializations to go through the CEC accreditation; they got accreditation on their first attempt under the leadership of Bill Brown.
    • Research the alternatives for states that have gotten waivers.
    • Chris Stabile: Do we have partnerships with any local school districts? Melissa: We have a team now that is looking at partnerships with key districts.
    • Chris Stabile: Focus more on the research perspective in our coursework (e.g., research seminar, methodologies, etc.) Melissa: Learners are required to take research courses, including courses that focus on research methodologies and development of a research proposal. But, it may be beneficial to add a seminar after the comps to acclimate them to the SMR process and review topics that were presented during the research courses. Also, some type of educational philosophy or educational theory course would be helpful.
    • Carol Pasasen: This would apply to all specializations, not just C&I. Instructors can always tell who is going to have trouble with their dissertation (e.g., marginal comps performance, C students . . .). Perhaps there should be required interventions in place throughout the program for learners who struggle with writing and with critical thinking.
       
  •    LEA
    • We developed two new courses and a program evaluation was completed in July 2011 in which we identified several gaps, in particular MS program learners taking EDS/PhD courses, so we have developed courses specifically for MS learners. Also, breaking out building versus district leader courses (historically we have had both building and district level leaders take the same courses with the exception of the internship, ED7852 and ED7543). Now adding diversity course developed by Pat Guillory. We are adding a new technology course developed by Ted (ED7016); ED8812 previously an elective, now required for superintendent learners; made revisions to ED7544 (Dr. Corkill is working on this course now) which is now a required course for superintendents (previously an elective, so not many learners took it). We’ve not yet been able to make all of the changes we hoped for due to funding limitation, but we anticipate moving forward with more changes in the future. LEA faculty suggestions we have so far include new courseroom technologies to enable use of iPads and iPhones in the evaluation process, work to expand our program into other states, and ideas to overcome the SMR process roadblocks/delays.
    • Follow-up Email from Jerry Horgen: #1) It’s good to mention the accomplishments of Capella. I'm constantly asked about certification issues with my fellow superintendents and I "constantly" throw out the NCATE certification.#2) The rationale for "School and Community Relations" is, a) The money follows the student...in other words, when students leave the public school for an alternative, that's a $5000-$6000 loss...that will get the superintendent's attention! b)  Most school districts have 20% of their parents that have kids in schools. Thus, when we superintendents want to pass an operating levy or bond issue, we need to convince the other 80% of the need. c) Each superintendent in Minnesota "markets" their school. I'm guessing it's the same in other states as well.
       
  •      SEL
    • Bill Brown – recommended that Capella setup booths at professional meetings to get the word out and increase exposure.  Overall, with our NCATE accreditation, our program is even stronger. SEL was the first program to get approved, was approved based on the first submission. We need to do more to get the word out about Capella. We will have a booth at the NEA conference in Denver in April.
    • Regarding changes for current courses, Bill Brown noted that most have been recently revised; Dennis Flood has been working on the internship courses. SEL course are currently aligned with CEC standards.
    • Needs in additional areas, other courses to consider? ED7545 is a survey course for all administrators, a very strong course—Dennis Flood proposes a readings course, an independent study at the doctoral level, perhaps an elective—theory, practice. This course would allow doctoral level learners to be exposed to most current research.
    • Carol Burnworth noted that we do have one course, ED7545, that has a population of learners who will be principals, though it is not specific to special ed. ED7550 pertains to the director of special ed position, so we have one course specifically for spec ed leadership.
    • Perhaps we need more focus on brain based teaching/learning, marketing, and especially legal aspects/law for special ed. ED7552 (law & finance) is the course we have. Perhaps put in another law class in place of ED7545. ED7823 has a unit that specifically focuses on special ed law.
    • Recommended resource: Essentials of IDEA for Assessment Professionals by Guy McBride, Ron Dumont, John O. Willis, Alan S. Kaufman,  Nadeen L. Kaufman.  ISBN-13: 978-0470873922
    • Should also have a course on technology for C&I.
    • Compiled list of recommendations will be sent out to all, please add your recommendations.
    • Ron Dougall: Writing should be a part of every scoring rubric, should be weighted more heavily than it is; is generally seeing very poor quality writing (e.g. 35 comments to a 5-page paper, evenly split between writing and content). Melissa: We have added writing rubric to LEA courses and other courses as they are revised.
    • Ron Dougall: 7544 does have a writing rubric, but he still continues to be frustrated—before the assignment was due, posted two announcements telling learners that papers that do not follow these guidelines will be returned unread; still 4 of 6 papers submitted were not aligned with the guidelines. Melissa: sometimes, instructors have to grade the paper and provide specific feedback about the problems to get their attention; once they start seeing their poor grades, learners should start paying attention to the guidelines. Ultimately, we have to hold them accountable. There is nothing wrong with providing learners with an opportunity to make revisions to their papers after they have been graded if the instructor wants to do that.

For the Good of Group

  • Skot Beazley requested all to share with him concerns/recommendations regarding the SMR process before this Friday’s meeting (1:15 CST). Melissa will re-send the meeting invitation and breeze link to Adrienne Gibson. We now have 160 learners in the mandatory SMR process. Donna Flood noted that perhaps we need an SMR course after comps, a 10-week course during which learners work with one faculty member who helps them put together the SMR.

  • Clare Boyce noted that the colloquium process is also in transition to focus on SMR as the next step in the dissertation process.

  • Phil Corkill asked, “Several of your are teaching at other universities, do any of your universities have a similar process?” Linda Crawford responded that Walden & UOP have similar processes.

  • SMR process is eating into the 52 weeks mentees have to produce a mentor approved proposal. Whoever came up with the process probably thought this would move along more smoothly, faster than it does, so it is not incorporated into the milestones. Learners have asked why this is not a milestone. It is taking up to a minimum of two quarters to get through SMR. An intro or course on SMR would be helpful to learners.  Dennis Flood added during his PhD program he had a proposal writing course with John Creswell, so all students knew that their proposal was solid when they got out of that course.

  • Question: Do we know the longest piece of writing that is expected from our learners throughout our courses? Answer: Individual papers—5-7 pages, final papers 10-15 or even 20-25 pages.

  • FYI from Michael Jazzar—comps are being returned now and are being sent out to faculty soon, so please check your email.

  • Please make a note of the last day to submit SMR's, Proposals, and final Dissertations is the week before the quarter ends. The last day of the quarter is March 16, 2012. So, a week before would be March 9, 2012 by 11:59 pm.

New report IDs problems with international school rankings: Common Core standards also predicted to have little impact on U.S. achievement

A new report that tackles a number of hot-button education issues argues that U.S. academic performance might not be as poor as originally thought when compared to other countries—and that the Common Core standards might not have the impact many are hoping.

The 2012 Brown Center Report on American Education is organized into three sections: Common Core State Standards, achievement gaps in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and international test scores and rankings.

A new study exposes mistakes often made when interpreting test data.

Click here to read the 2012 Brown Center Report.

 

[excerpt from eSchool News, February 17, 2012]

Valuable Dissertation Research Resources for Mentors and Mentees

KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

 by Mike Worthington

One of my observations working with doctoral learners for the past 14 years is that they tend to understand when and why we conduct quantitative research much better than they tend to understand when and why we conduct qualitative research.  Some doctoral learners decide to conduct qualitative research either out of a fear of statistics or dislike of numbers or out of the belief that qualitative research is easier to conduct and those reasons are never valid reasons to conduct a qualitative study.  The type of methodology should be determined by the research problem, the purpose of the study, and how the research questions are framed.  Doctoral learners often do not understand that typically a qualitative study requires far more time and effort than a quantitative study.  Good qualitative research is hard work.  Although challenging, qualitative research can be quite rewarding for those learners who want to explore some phenomenon at a deep and detailed level that quantitative research cannot achieve.  I will highlight some significant differences and characteristics of each methodology.
 
In helping learners see the big picture I really like Sharan Merriam’s broad definition of qualitative research.  Qualitative research is an umbrella concept covering several forms of inquiry that help us understand and explain the meaning of social phenomena with as little disruption of the natural setting as possible” (1998, p. 5). The centrality of meaning appears again and again in defining qualitative research within the qualitative methodological literature.

Consider also Michael Patton’s (1985) definition:
[Qualitative research] is an effort to understand situations in their uniqueness as part of a particular context and the interactions there.  This understanding is an end in itself, so that it is not attempting to predict what might happen in the future necessarily, but to understand the nature of that setting – what it means for participants to be in that setting, what their lives are like, what’s going on for them, what their meanings are, what the world looks like in that particular setting – and in the analysis to be able to communicate that faithfully to others who are interested in that setting . . . The analysis strives for depth of understanding. (p. 1)

Here again meaning of lived experience in context is central to qualitative research. Therefore an inquiry about how your participants perceive some issue or process does not fit with the methodological definitions of qualitative research.  Perceptions can be collected via quantitative survey research, although the need to obtain and measure those perceptions should driven by a practitioner’s practice problem or the literature.
 
Here is another broad means to distinguish the key differences between quantitative and qualitative research and deciding which methodology fits best.  The aim of qualitative research is discovery, while the aim of quantitative research is verification.  The goal of qualitative research is to gain an in depth understanding and explanation of some particular social phenomenon typically done by attempting to understand the lived experiences of the participants and how they construct meaning and make sense of their experiences.  Frequently the data collection is done by interviewing; however, an understanding of the social phenomenon and personal lived experiences of individuals might be gained via non-intrusive qualitative approaches in which the researcher might use texts, journals, written narratives, observations, or other unobtrusive measures to examine the traces of humans and how they were affected by some ideological, social, psychological, legal, political, and/or technological factors.  Qualitative research seeks to answer questions that focus on the meaning, essence, and interpretation of social phenomena with as little disruption to the natural setting as possible.  Frequently central qualitative research questions begin with "How?" and/or "Why?" questions, but can begin with a "What?" question as well.  
 
Quantitative research, on the other hand, explores descriptive analysis of characteristics through variables or answers questions about the relationships among variables (values assigned to characteristics or factors) with the purpose of measuring, explaining, predicting, confirming, validating, testing, or controlling phenomena.  Quantitative research studies generally end with a summation of the verification process, which is a confirmation or disconfirmation of the hypotheses tested via deductive reasoning.  Qualitative research typically does not begin with hypotheses although it is not unusual for qualitative studies to conclude with tentative working hypotheses drawn from the themes and their properties via inductive reasoning.
 
There is no measurement in qualitative research. Variables, used for measuring, are used only in quantitative research; variables are NOT used in qualitative research. However, two exceptions might include (a) action research, which might include a quantitative component; and (b) a qualitative program evaluation or evaluative case study that collects and measures quantitative data in addition to collecting qualitative data.
 
A variable is quantitative expression of a construct that can vary quantity or quality in observed phenomenon (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 2006).  Thus a variable is a characteristic or finding that can vary and thus can be expressed in values that can vary.  The opposite of a variable is a constant.  A condition that does not change is a constant and not a variable.  A human being is never a variable.
 
The aim of qualitative research is NOT measurement but discovery; thus we do not use variables in qualitative research.  We do not use qualitative research to verify or confirm our hypotheses.  The focus of qualitative research is the discovery of "meaning in context."  Remember the aim of qualitative research is the discovery and understanding of our participants' experiences and the meaning our participants ascribe to their experiences and related social phenomena and we conduct such an inquiry without disrupting the natural setting.  Attempting to understand meaning is central to qualitative research. 
 
Often learners will state that they want to conduct a qualitative study to understand the perceptions of their participants.  The problem with that approach is that perceptions are easily quantifiable and perception research is typically done via surveys that are quantitative data collection tools.  Although understanding perceptions can be a secondary or tertiary goal of qualitative research, the primary goal should always be focused on lived experiences and meaning or understanding a process from the experiences of those individuals who participate in that process.
 
If you want to understand your participants' perceptions, opinions, and views without primarily understanding their own lived experiences and the meaning they ascribe to their lived experiences, propose quantitative survey research.  We construct and use surveys to obtain, understand, and measure opinions, perceptions, and views.  We conduct qualitative research to go beyond perceptions in order understand personal experiences and the corresponding meaning making related to those experiences. 
 
I recommend avoiding qualitative research that examines opinions.  For such studies you can anticipate committee members asking (a) why can’t the opinions be collected via quantitative survey research? (b) what value is there in knowing the opinions of a small group of individuals? and (c) how will knowing the opinions of small group of individuals advance theory?  Consider this quote from the Capella Dissertation Manual (2010):
 
The dissertation is not just descriptive; it has a sound extant basis or a well-developed conceptual basis that leads to the question(s) under investigation. This basis serves as the origin for conclusions and inferences that lead to further research, to enhanced theoretical understanding, and to recommendations for organizational improvement (in cases of action science). (p. 8)
 
I think it would be quite unusual or unlikely that the sound extant or conceptual basis would lead to an examination of opinions or that an examination of opinions will advance theoretical understanding.  I suppose an exception might be a Delphi Technique study using nationally renowned experts whose valuable opinions might be used to lead to organizational improvement or the best strategic planning.  Please also note that the Delphi Technique is an acceptable School of Education research design yet it remains highly controversial to many of our faculty members.
 
Please note that qualitative research can also be used to understand a process – how a process works from the understanding and perceptions of those individuals who participated in the process.  Again the focus is on experiences.  For example, one of my former mentees wanted to know how school leaders, primarily principals, were able to move their schools to such high levels of culturally responsive education [those rated high by a state evaluation agency]. Thus she conducted extensive in depth interviews with about a dozen successful principals regarding their strategies and practices that seemed to be most effective.  In addition to uncovering the intricacies of the successful process and strategies, she also uncovered the obstacles to planning and implementation.
 
Qualitative research in the form of action research can also be used to solve school problems, to improve our students’ learning or improve our teaching and administrating practices.  Action research can appear much like an experiment because we begin with reflection and measurement, make a change, and measure the results.  Qualitative research can also be used to make a social change as in participatory action research; however, this kind of research is tricky in that one of our IRB requirements is that we not contact our participants until the study is approved and true participatory action research is planned with the participants.  You see the dilemma?  The key feature of action research that makes it qualitative is its emergent nature.  Note also that action research is controversial and not supported by all of our specializations or faculty.  Attached is a list of School of Education acceptable research designs.
 
Mixed methods research is a form of research in which a design had both a quantitative and qualitative component.  Although pragmatism can support a mixed methods study, having a pragmatic philosophical framework does not obligate a researcher to conduct a mixed methods study.  Mixed methods research is really like carrying out two research studies and will require more time and effort than a single method study. The School of Education (SOE) allows but does not encourage mixed methods studies as (a) our learners struggle enough with a single method, (b) our research curricula do not teach mixed methods, (c) prior SOE dissertations attempting mixed methods were quite poor and most were not truly mixed methods studies, and (d) only a small number of mentors are skilled in supervising mixed methods studies.
 
Learners often believe that a mixed methods study can include a survey that contains a few open ended questions.  This approach is not mixed methods; it is a quantitative descriptive research using a survey to obtain data.  The open-ended items typically receive tersely written answers that are easily quantified.  A true mixed methods study includes both quantitative and qualitative methodological components [e.g., survey followed by lengthy in depth interviewing several participants] and philosophical components; that is, the traditions and philosophies underling each methodological component clearly identified [e.g., post-positivism for the survey and social constructivism for the interviews].  I particular support a mixed methods approach to experiments such as in a concurrent triangulation strategy or concurrent embedded strategy [see your Creswell text, Chapter 10].  Please note though that many mentors do not promote mixed methods research because (a) our research curricula does not adequately prepare our learners for conducting mixed methods research, and (b) conducting mixed methods research has the equivalent work load of conducting two studies.  However, when a learner in this class presents a research problem that is best approached with mixed methods research, I will help guide that learner to planning a solid study.
 
Regarding mixed methods research, unless you are proposing a pragmatic parallel or pragmatic sequential mixed method model, mixed methods studies will have a primary quantitative research question [for the quantitative component] and a central qualitative research question [for the qualitative component].  You can have as many additional quantitative and qualitative questions as you want but it is these two primary and central questions that will align with your problem and purpose statements and that drive the investigation in a mixed methods study.  The two questions need to complement each other in terms of the problem and purpose of the proposed research.  Each question will drive separate data collection procedures and separate data analysis processes.  For pragmatic parallel or pragmatic sequential mixed method model studies, the researcher develops one research question, independent quantitative and qualitative data collection processes, and infers a response to the single question from both sets [strands] of data.

SharePoint - Don't Forget This Convenient Document Depository

Sharepoint provides a "one-stop-shop" for all things faculty need to know—important documents, web links, templates . . . you name it! Dr. Sam Song manages our SharePoint website, and you can access the site here:  http://collaborate.capella.edu/teams/p12leadership_licensure

Meetings At-A-Glance

Specialization

Date(s)

Time

Number

Code

Leader

Quarterly

P-12

LLP:

C&I, SEL, & LEA Faculty

1st Tuesday of January, April, July & October 2012

8:00 AM Central

Time

&

6:30 PM

Central

Time

888-227-5650

28228#

Dr. Carolyn Rogers

Monthly Faculty Meeting for ALL Faculty

2nd Tuesday February, March, May, June, August, September, November, and December

8:00 AM Central

Time

&

6:30 PM

Central

Time

888-205-5513

348314#

Dr. Melissa McIntyre

Monthly Mentoring

P-12

LLP:

 C&I, SEL, & LEA All Mentors

Encouraged to Attend

February 21, 2012

 

7:00 PM

Central

Time

888-205-5513

 

328012#

 

 

Dr. Skot Beazley

Residential Colloquia

 

Winter 2012

March 29 - April 1, 2012

Atlanta, GA

Spring 2012

April 26-29, 2012

Arlington, VA

Spring 2012

May 3-6, 2012

Minneapolis, MN

Summer 2012

July 19-22, 2012

Atlanta, GA

Summer 2012

September 27-30, 2012

Jacksonville, FL

Fall 2012

October 25-28, 2012

Arlington, VA

Fall 2012

December 27-30, 2012

Dallas, TX

Professional Organizations & Other Valuable Links

American Association of School Administrators (AASA).

www.aasa.org/

American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

www.aft.org/

Association for Effective Schools, Inc.

www.mes.org/

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

www.ascd.org/

Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE).

http:cpre.wceruw.org

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).

www.ccsso.org/

Edutopia: The George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF).

www.edutopia.org/

National Alliance of Black School Educators (NABSE).

www.nabse.org/

National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP).

www.naesp.org/

National Education Association (NEA).

www.nea.org/

National Middle School Association (NMSA).

www.amle.org/

National School Boards Association (NSBA).

www.nsba.org/

National Staff Development Council (NSDC).

www.nsdc.org/

North Central Association Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA CASI).

www.ncacasi.org/

U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE)

www.ed.gov/

 
 
 

Just for Fun :<) 
 

 

 

Archives
 

 

Previous editions of the LEADnews are available by clicking the links below:

 

 

CAPELLA UNIVERSITY 225 SOUTH 6TH STREET, 9TH FLOOR MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402
 
 

LEADnews.net

 

 

Capella Proprietary and Confidential Information

Unauthorized Forwarding Prohibited

  •