Dept. of Educational Leadership Assessment Forum, April 18, 2014 Ball State University Written Comprehensive Examinations

Our Department A little about us: Graduate department in Teachers College Seven full-time faculty members Candidates are primarily teachers and administrators who are employed full-time in schools. Candidate Enrollment (fall 2013) MAE – current in rGrade 334 (Principal license) Ed.S. – current in rGrade 53 (Superintendent license) Ed.D. – current in rGrade 68 (with or w/out Supt. license)

Department of Educational Leadership

Our Standards: We follow the ELCC and Indiana Content Standards for preparation of school leaders: 1. Vision 2. School Culture, Instruction, Curriculum 3. Management 4. Collaboration 5. Ethics 6. Political, Social, Economic, Legal, and Cultural Context of Schools

Background on Comprehensive Exams Our Ed.S. and Ed.D. candidates take written and oral comprehensive examinations at the end of their programs. Exams are offered three times per year: winter, spring and summer We typically have 5-10 students take the comp. exams each time

Our goals for improving the comprehensive exams: Improving relevancy Maintaining rigor Focusing on high levels of cognition Aligning with best practices

Changes that have been developed and implemented this school year include: 1. Case Study Approach – Integrated questions, students appreciate “real-world” problems, mimics testing approach for license, aligns with mission 2. “Take-Home” Portion - Double-edged sword (has reduced time on campus, but we may need to place limit on length and use of outside experts) 3. Improved Efficiency – Faculty now on a rotation for content assigned for questions. Some questions now used for both Ed.S. and Ed.D. One posting on Blackboard for study focus. “Distinguished” category has helped with assessment and provided a “reward.”

Changes that have been developed and implemented this school year include, cont. 4. Ed.D. Question on Dissertation – Has led to helpful discussions with committee about dissertation, proposal development, etc. 5. Standard-Based Rubrics for Assessment - developed collaboratively by faculty, collaborative scoring. 6. Blackboard Community for Faculty and Candidates – Facilitates communications, e.g., faculty post study guides and rubrics, candidates form study groups.

Assessing the comprehensive exams for future changes: 1.We are carefully looking candidates’ performance on the new comp. exams. 2.We are holding “focus groups” to discuss new process, format, and questions. 3.We are seeking, gathering, and considering informal feedback from candidates.

This is a work in progress. We plan to continue making changes, for example: 1. Still working on “tweaking” rubrics and scoring metrics 2. All professors providing timely scoring and feedback to candidates 3. Modifications to take-home portion 4. Many changes have come and will continue to come from candidate feedback

Dept. of Educational Leadership Questions/Comments? Please feel free to contact us for more information: Lori Boyland, Marilynn Quick,