Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect

Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect

INTRODUCTIONS Jennifer Palmer-Lee Member Since 2005 Associate of Arts in General Studies Austin Community College Bachelor of Arts in Art History University of Texas at Austin Master of Arts in Film/English Arizona State University at Tempe Texas Regional Alumni Association President Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association President

INTRODUCTIONS Jeannie Schaefer Member Since 2009 Associate of Arts in Education Austin Community College Bachelor of Science in Education Texas State University Texas Regional Alumni Association Member Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association Vice President

INTRODUCTIONS Katherine Lyon Member Since 2006 Associate of Arts in Art Metal Associate of Arts in Jewelry Associate of Arts in Business Mgt Austin Community College Texas Regional Alumni Association District V Representative Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association Treasurer

WHY US? Years of Experience (Over 40 Years!) We’ve been where you are
Trained by Headquarters We want to see you on stage

EXPECTATIONS We can’t guarantee any results (aka getting on stage)
We can facilitate help Help is first come, first served Help takes time Don’t be scared of the red pen! It is there to help you. The judges are judging you, we are helping you take on that critical gaze

TODAY’S DISCUSSION Honors in Action

QUESTIONS FOR YOU Who knows the title of the Honors Study Topic?
Who knows how many years it lasts and the start and end dates of a project? Who knows your chapters’ chosen theme? Who has read the Honors Study Topic Guide? Who is leadership for your Honors in Action Project? Who participated in a HiA project last year? Who knows what a rubric is? Who has read the rubric for the 2019 Honors Study Topic?

HONORS IN ACTION Goal: Real world applied learning and problem-solving by developing in-depth, action-oriented projects. The “action” is informed by semester long research (spring). Skills-exploration of multiple perspectives to inform decision-making. Draw research conclusions and idea development. Planning, team, and leadership team building. Learn to deal with obstacles to accomplish goals.

HONORS IN ACTION: Steps
Investigate & Analyze (Planning Model & HiA Rubric) Strategize & Lead (HiA Guide & HiA Rubric) Act & Serve (Brainstorm & HiA Rubric) Assess & Reflect (HiA Rubric)

HONORS IN ACTION: Components
Academic Research & Analysis Action (Service/Advocacy & Collaboration) Impact

HONORS IN ACTION: Purpose
Honors in Action projects require substantive academic investigation of a theme related to the Society’s current Honors Study Topic. The theme you select should be directly connected to and provide supporting evidence for the development of the action component of your project. Honors in Action projects require you to address a need in your community that was discovered through your research and analysis into the Society’s current Honors Study Topic. The current Phi Theta Kappa Honors Program Guide is a primary resource to help you develop and implement your Honors in Action Project.

Wednesday January 16, 2019 at 5:00pm CST
DEADLINE Wednesday January 16, at 5:00pm CST

BIG CHANGES & SOME TIPS Use American Psychological Association (APA) Style Format for your sources Use Oxford Commas (Serial Comma) If using an acronym, spell it out and use parenthesis the first time, then use the acronym This is only a chapter project, no piggy-backing on another project There isn’t a need to use titles for individuals

WORD COUNT 2,600 Words 7 Questions – This is a change! In previous years it was 12 questions. Less questions, same word count. No word limit is given to each question, but is 2,600 words for the entire application.

KEEP IN MIND This is about the Honors Study Topic Transformations: Acknowledging, Assessing, and Achieving Change NOT YOUR THEME

QUESTION 1: Abstract Provide a brief abstract or summary of your Honors in Action project including the following components: academic research into and analysis of sources related to the Honors Study Topic, action that addresses a need in your community that was discovered through your research and analysis into the Society’s current Honors Study Topic, and the impact of your project.

QUESTION 1: TIPS Recommended word count for the abstract is no more than 300 words. This means you should probably keep it under 300 words. Was there contribution to understanding the Honors Study Topic?

QUESTION 1: Example This research looks at the work of Margaret C. Anderson, the editor of the Little Review. The review published first works by Sherwood Anderson, James Joyce, Wyndham Lewis, and Ezra Pound. This research draws upon mostly primary sources including memoirs, published letters, and a complete collection of the Little Review. Most prior research on Anderson focuses on her connection to the famous writers and personalities that she published and associated with. This focus undermines her role as the dominant creative force behind one of the most influential little magazines published in the 20th Century. This case example shows how little magazine publishing is arguably a literary art.

QUESTION 2: HiA Theme This is not included in your word count. It is a choice from a list.

QUESTION 3: Project Objectives
In other words, what did your chapter set out to accomplish in terms of its research, collaborations, and action?

QUESTION 3: TIPS What did you set out to accomplish? This IS NOT about what you accomplished, that’s question 7. Include 3 to 4 main project objectives. Make sure it includes the impact for all involved in the project. Did you address how it contributed to understanding the Honors Study Topic?

QUESITON 4: Academic Research
This is your research question(s), your analysis of your research findings, and your research conclusions.

QUESTION 4: TIPS 1 of 2 Describe your research into the Honors Study Topic Guide. Describe your research into the Topic. This IS NOT about research about your theme specifically, it’s about the topic, “transformations”. Describe the journey of your research question(s). Again, this IS NOT about your theme specifically.

QUESTION 4: TIPS 2 of 2 Describe your research findings.
Describe your research conclusions. What are your estimated quantitative & qualitative outcomes? Did you address how it contributed to understanding the Honors Study Topic?

QUESTION 4: Insights 1 of 3 The question says to discuss your research question(s). This includes your starter question listed on the theme page. Overall, your final project/theme must answer the original question posed in the Honors Study Topic Guide Theme AND your research question.

QUESTION 4: Insights 2 of 3 The judges want to know that you used the guide and followed the course of research that looks like this: HONORS STUDY TOPIC  THEME  THEME QUESTION  RESEARCH  RESEARCH QUESTION(s)  ACTION  IMPACT

QUESTION 4: Insights 3 of 3 The judges want to know what the research told you and want to know where did you end up.

QUESTION 5: 8 Academic/ Expert Sources
These are enlightening regarding multiple perspectives of the Honors Study Topic theme you selected. Briefly explain why these were the most important sources and what you learned from each of them as you researched your theme.

QUESTION 5: TIPS Please use formal APA citations for your entry.
Use your best research findings that have a direct and enlightening connection to your project. Explain why each source is important. Explain what you learned from the source. You can use more than 8 sources, you just cannot list them in question 5. DO NOT quote sources anywhere in your project. Your project should just touch on research titles that led your research. Was there contribution to understanding the Honors Study Topic?

QUESTION 5: Insights Abstracts should tell the judges the following:
Why was the source better than all the other sources? You researched varying viewpoints or differing opinions. Research does not have to be opposing viewpoints, because in certain cases, there are none.

QUESTION 5: Example Battle, K. (2007). Child poverty: The evolution and impact of child benefits. In Covell, K., & Howe, R. B. (Eds), A question of commitment: Children's rights in Canada (pp ). Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Ken Battle draws on his research as an extensively-published policy analyst, and a close study of some government documents, to explain child benefits in Canada. He outlines some fundamental assumptions supporting the belief that all society members should contribute to the upbringing of children. His comparison of Canadian child poverty rates to those in other countries provides a useful wake-up to anyone assuming Canadian society is doing a good job of protecting children from want. He pays particular attention to the National Child Benefit (NCB), arguing that it did not deserve the criticism it received from politicians and journalists. He outlines the NCB’s development, costs, and benefits, including its dollar contribution to a typical recipient’s income. He laments that the Conservative government scaled back the program in favour of the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB), and clearly explains why it is inferior. However, Battle relies too heavily on his own work; he is the sole or primary author of almost half the sources in his bibliography. He could make this work stronger by drawing from the perspectives of others' analyses. However, Battle does offer a valuable source for this essay, because the chapter provides a concise overview of government- funded assistance currently available to parents. This offers context for analyzing the scope and financial reality of child poverty in Canada.

QUESTION 5: Citation Specifics
DO use academic scholarly journal white papers, which are peer reviewed and current. DO NOT use books older than 3 years old, unless it is historical topic and use FEW books. Focus on the peer reviewed academic journals. Interviews HAVE TO BE with subject matter experts AND HAVE TO BE in person with questions written prior to the interview. Surveys are required to be created in conjunction with research/data experts with questions that are unbiased and valid. Otherwise, they WILL NOT be considered academic surveys.

QUESTION 5: Citation Help
DO use your research librarians and English instructors Purdue OWL is a great resource

QUESTION 6: Service or “Action” Components
What about your Honors in Action project were inspired by and directly connected to your Honors Study Topic research. (Action can also include promoting awareness and advocacy.) Be sure to include information about the people and/or groups with whom you collaborated, why you chose these collaborators, and the impact they had on the outcomes of the project.

QUESTION 6: TIPS Describe why and how your research is directly connected to your action/advocacy. Include why you chose your collaboration partners, who they are, and their impact on the project. The judges want to see that you collaborated with people/agencies/advocates outside of the college. This is a global Honors Study Topic! Move outside of your college bubble. How is action/advocacy connected to the Honors Study Topic? Did you show a contribution to lifelong intentional service? Was there contribution to understanding the Honors Study Topic?

QUESTION 7: Quantitative & Qualitative Outcomes
What impact did your project have on the problem addressed and on opportunities for chapter members and others to grow as scholars and leaders.

QUESTION 7: TIPS 1 of 2 Include quantitative (numbers) outcomes.
Include qualitative (comments, experiences) information. Incorporate service learning and reflection. Did your qualitative and quantitative outcomes address the objectives in question 3? Did you show contributions to improving the issue through impact?

QUESTION 7: TIPS 2 of 2 Describe how chapter members and others in the community grew in scholarship and leadership. Remember, this is about the community, NOT THE SCHOOL or CHAPTER (that is what College Project is for). DO NOT piggy-back on another chapter/advocacy event. Create a new event. Was there contribution to understanding the Honors Study Topic? Was reflection included?

YOUR PROJECT IS PROCESS DRIVEN
The judges are all about understanding your process. When answering questions, ALWAYS keep the following things in the forefront: Topic Research (NOT THEME) Intention Theme Question (and your research question) Sustainability Communication Collaboration Service Learning and Leadership Action/Advocacy Global Impact Reflection

WHEN YOU THINK YOU ARE DONE
Think again Have members who haven’t worked on the project read your essays. Remember, they don’t know the project in and out. They may have insights to make answers clearer for the judges, who also have no idea what your project is trying to accomplish. Give at least 3 people outside of your chapter the questions, your answers, and the rubric to have them judge your essays. These can be teachers, the learning lab, alumni, and others.

ARE YOU DONE YET? Probably not
You can your project to the TRAA. One or more alumni, who are trained, will read your essays and provide comments and grammatical changes. Remember, the red pen is your friend!

RUBRIC POINTS STRUCTURE

COMPOENENTS Academic Rigor of Research – 34 Points
Service/Action – 33 Points Impact – 33 Points Total Points: 100

ACADEMIC RIGOR OF RESEARCH Worth 34 Points
Research Question – 5 Points Project Objectives – 5 Points Academic Research – 5 Points Research Conclusions – 5 Points Bibliography/Citations A. Academic Sources – 3 Points Bibliography/Citations B. Sources’ Range of Viewpoints – 3 Points Citations A. APA Citations Structure – 3 Points Citations B. Bibliographic Annotations 3 Points Spelling & Grammar – 2 Points

RESEARCH QUESTION 5 points - The chapter developed a thoughtful, answerable research question to guide its academic investigation of the Honors Study Topic through one of the themes in the /2019 Honors Program Guide. 4 points - The chapter developed a research question to guide its academic investigation of the Honors Study Topic. 3 points - The chapter developed a research question that minimally guided its academic investigation of the Honors Study Topic. 2 points – The chapter conducted research without a clear research question to guide its investigation into the Honors Study Topic. 1 point – The chapter conducted research without a research question.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES 5 points - Project objectives clearly emphasized the importance of intentional research as the cornerstone of the Honors in Action project. 4 points - Project objectives included the importance of intentional research as the cornerstone of the Honors in Action project 3 points – Project objectives minimally included the importance of intentional research as the cornerstone of the Honors in Action project. 2 points – Project objectives about the importance of intentional research were unclear. 1 point – Project objectives did not include the importance of intentional research.

ACADEMIC RESEARCH 1 of 2 5 points - The entry clearly conveys in-depth academic research into the Honors Study Topic through one of the Themes in the current Honors Program Guide. 4 points – The chapter conducted substantive research into a theme in the current Honors Program Guide, though the direct connection to the Honors Study Topic is unclear. 3 points – The chapter conducted research into a Theme in the current Honors Program Guide, but there is no explicit connection to the Honors Study Topic

ACADEMIC RESEARCH 2 of 2 2 points – The chapter conducted minimal research into one of the Themes in the current Honors Program Guide and did not explicitly connect its research to the Honors Study Topic. 1 point – No evidence to indicate chapter conducted academic research into a Theme in the current Honors Program Guide.

RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS 1 of 2
5 points - The in-depth academic research clearly provided substantial material for the chapter to carefully weigh and consider in determining an action component to implement that clearly addressed a finding and is directly connected to their research conclusions. Clear, compelling evidence shows the research activities allowed participants to strengthen critical thinking skills. 4 points - Academic research provided material for the chapter to consider in determining an action component to implement that addressed a finding and is connected to their research conclusions. Evidence shows the research activities allowed participants to develop critical thinking skills.

RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS 2 of 2
3 points - The entry shows some evidence of academic research into the Honors Study Topic, and the team’s research provided material for the chapter to consider in determining an action component to implement that addressed a finding. 2 points – The entry shows minimal evidence of academic research into the Honors Study Topic, and the action component of the project is not clearly and directly connected to the research and/or the action component of the project was decided before the chapter conducted its research into the Honors Study Topic. 1 point – The entry shows no evidence of academic research into the Honors Study Topic and no explicit connection between the research and action components of the project.

ACADEMIC SOURCES 3 points - The chapter’s research included 8 sources that were clearly academic publications, academic interviews with expert sources conducted in the past year by the chapter team. 2 points - The research included 8 sources, at least 6-7 of which were from academic publications or academic interviews with expert sources conducted in the past year by the chapter team. 1 point – The chapter’s research included sources that only included 5 or fewer from academic publications or academic interviews with expert sources conducted in the past year by the chapter team.

SOURCES’ RANGE OF VIEWPOINTS
3 points - Expert sources are clearly wide-ranging and clearly represent different points of view about the Honors Study Topic and the theme selected by the chapter from the current Honors Program Guide. 2 points - Expert sources are somewhat wide-ranging and represent some different points of view about the Honors Study Topic and the theme selected by the chapter from the current Honors Program Guide. 1 point – There is little evidence that sources are wide-ranging and represent different points of view about the Honors Study Topic and the theme selected by the chapter from the current Honors Program Guide.

APA CITATIONS STRUCTURE
3 points - The APA citations are formal, full, and consistent in structure. 2 points - Citations are formal and consistent in structure, but not all citations show full information about the source. 1 point – Citations are not formal, full, and consistent in structure

BIBLIOGRAPHIC ANNOATIONS
3 points - Bibliographic annotations of academic sources provide robust evidence supporting why the source was significant to the chapter’s research and how the evidence clearly related to the chapter’s research conclusions. 2 points - Bibliographic annotations of academic sources provide some evidence supporting why the source was significant to the chapter’s research and how the evidence related to the chapter’s research conclusions. 1 point - Bibliographic annotations of academic sources provide little or no evidence supporting why the source was significant to the chapter’s research and how the evidence related to the chapter’s research conclusions.

SPELLING AND GRAMMAR 2 points - Spelling and grammar are faultless.
1 point - There were a few errors in spelling and/or grammar. .5 point - There were spelling and/or grammar errors throughout.

SERVICE/ACTION Worth 33 Points
Action Objectives – 5 Points Action’s Connection to Honors Study Topic – 6 Points Outreach/Collaboration – 5 Points Communication – 5 Points Heightened Awareness of Self/Community in Relation to Global Issues – 5 Points Increased Appreciation for Value of Informed Action as Lifelong Endeavor – 5 Points Spelling & Grammar – 2 Points

ACTION OBJECTIVES 1 of 2 5 points - Project objectives were clearly measurable and clearly emphasized the importance of taking action or serving AND emphasized the clearly-defined proposed scope of the project. 4 points – Project objectives were measurable and emphasized the importance of taking action or serving and defined the scope of the project.

ACTION OBJECTIVES 2 of 2 3 points – Project objectives were minimally related to the action part of the project and minimally defined the project’s scope. 2 points – Project objectives were unclear and/or did not relate to the action part of the project or define the scope of the project. 1 point – Project objectives were unclear and the scope of the project was not defined.

ACTION’S CONNECTION TO HST 1 of 2
6 points – The chapter clearly shows with specific evidence how the action was developed from the chapter’s Honors Study Topic research conclusions. 5 points – The chapter shows how the action was developed from the chapter’s Honors Study Topic research conclusions. 4 points – The chapter implicitly shows how the action was developed from the chapter’s research conclusions.

ACTION’S CONNECTION TO HST 2 of 2
3 points – The chapter conducted Honors Study Topic research, but the action did not appear to develop from the chapter’s research conclusions. 2 points – The chapter developed the action piece of the project without strong connections to academic research into the Honors Study Topic. 1 point – The chapter engaged in action/service with little or no Honors Study Topic research to support the need for the project.

OUTREACH/COLLABORATION 1 of 2
5 points - The chapter’s project (Academic Investigation and/or Action) reached a variety of audiences including BOTH the college and the community, and the role(s) played by collaborators were substantive and stemmed from the chapter’s research conclusions. 4 points - The chapter’s project (Academic Investigation and/or Action) reached a variety of audiences including BOTH the college and the community, and the collaborators were selected as good fits for the action selected as a result of the chapter’s research conclusions.

OUTREACH/COLLABORATION 2 of 2
3 points – The chapter’s project (Academic Investigation and/or Action) reached a variety of audiences including BOTH the college and the community. 2 points – The chapter’s project (Academic Investigation and/or Action) reached at least one of the following: the college or the community. 1 point – Little or no evidence that the chapter worked with outside collaborators from the college or community.

COMMUNICATION 1 of 2 5 points - There is clear and compelling evidence that communication among the participating individuals and/or organizations was effective and efficient and that they explicitly shared common objectives. 4 points - There is substantive evidence that communication among the participating individuals and/or organizations was effective and efficient and that they shared common objectives.

COMMUNICATION 2 of 2 3 points - There is evidence that communication among the participating individuals and/or organizations was effective and that they shared common objectives. 2 points – There is some evidence that communication among the participating individuals and/or organizations was effective. 1 point – There is little or no evidence that communication among the participating individuals and/or organizations was effective.

HEIGHTENED AWARENESS OF SELF & COMMUNITY IN RELATION TO GLOBAL ISSUES
5 points – Solid, specific evidence is given that chapter, college, and community participants heightened their awareness of self and community in relation to global issues. 4 points – Solid, specific evidence is given that chapter participants heightened their awareness of self and community in relation to global issues. 3 points - Evidence is given that participants heightened their awareness of self and community in relation to global issues. 2 points – Minimal evidence is given that participants heightened their awareness of self and community in relation to global issues. 1 point – There is no evidence given that participants heightened their awareness of self and community in relation to global issues.

INCREASED APPRECIATION FOR VALUE OF INFORMED ACTION AS LIFELONG ENDEAVOR
5 points – The entry provided clear. strong, and specific evidence that participants increased their appreciation for the value of informed action/service as a lifelong endeavor. 4 points - The entry provided clear evidence that participants increased their appreciation for the value of informed action/service as a lifelong endeavor. 3 points – The entry provided evidence that participants increased their appreciation for the value of informed action/service as a lifelong endeavor, though the evidence could have been more specific. 2 points – The entry provided minimal evidence that participants increased their appreciation for the value of informed action/service as a lifelong endeavor. 1 points – The entry provided little or no specific evidence that participants increased their appreciation for the value of informed action/service as a lifelong endeavor

IMPACT Worth 33 Points Contribution to Understanding of the Honors Study Topic – 6 Points Contribution to Understanding of the Importance of Lifelong Intentional Service – 5 Points Contribution to Improving an Issue within the Clearly-Defined Proposed Scope – 5 Points Research Quantitative and Qualitative Outcomes – 5 Points Action Quantitative and Qualitative Outcomes – 5 Points Reflection – 5 Points Spelling & Grammar – 2 Points

CONTRIBUTION TO UNDERSTANDING OF THE HONORS STUDY TOPIC
6 points - Without question, the project made substantial, specific contributions to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic. 5 points – The project made a strong contribution to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic. 4 points – The project contributed to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic. 3 points – The project made some contributions to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic. 2 points – The project made minimal contributions to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic. 1 point – Little or no evidence to support the project’s contribution to participants’ understanding of a theme as it relates to the current Honors Study Topic.

CONTRIBUTION TO UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPORTANCE OF LIFELONG INTENTIONAL SERVICE
5 points – Without question, the action piece of the project made a substantial, specific, and measurable contribution to improving an issue determined from the chapter’s Honors Study Topic research conclusions and within the clearly-defined proposed scope. 4 points – The action piece of the project made a strong contribution to improving an issue determined from the chapter’s Honors Study Topic research conclusions and within the defined proposed scope. 3 points – The action piece of the project made a contribution to improving an issue determined from the chapter’s Honors Study Topic research conclusions and within the defined proposed scope. 2 points – The action piece of the project made a contribution to improving an issue within the defined proposed scope. 1 point – The contribution to improving an issue of the action piece of the project is unclear and/or the scope of the project is unclear.

CONTRIBUTION TO IMPROVING AN ISSUE WITHIN THE CLEARLY-DEFINED SCOPE
5 points – Without question, the project had significant, specific short-term impact and clear potential for long-term impact. 4 points – The project had strong short-term impact and clear potential for long-term impact. 3 points – The project had some short-term impact and potential for long-term impact. 2 points – The project had minimal short-term impact and minimal potential for long- term impact. 1 point - The short-term impact and potential for long-term impact of the project is unclear.

RESEARCH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE OUTCOMES
5 points – Without question, the project’s research outcomes were exceptional and specific for the Honors in Action time frame, addressed the chapter’s objectives, and were both quantitative and qualitative. 4 points – The chapter addressed the project’s research outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame, addressed the chapter’s objectives, and included both quantitative and qualitative evidence. 3 points – The chapter addressed the project’s research outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame and included both quantitative and qualitative evidence. 2 points – The chapter addressed their project’s research outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame and included quantitative OR qualitative evidence. 1 point – The project’s research outcomes were unclear for the Honors in Action time frame though the entry may have included quantitative and/or qualitative outcomes.

ACTION QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE OUTCOMES
5 points – Without question, the project’s action outcomes were exceptional and specific for the Honors in Action time frame, addressed the chapter’s objectives, and were both quantitative and qualitative. 4 points – The chapter addressed the project’s action outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame, addressed the chapter’s objectives, and included both quantitative and qualitative evidence. 3 points – The chapter addressed the project’s action outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame and included both quantitative and qualitative evidence. 2 points – The chapter addressed the project’s action outcomes for the Honors in Action time frame and included quantitative or qualitative evidence. 1 point – The project’s action outcomes were unclear for the Honors in Action time frame though the entry may have included quantitative and/or qualitative outcomes.

REFLECTION 5 points – Without question the chapter assessed in an intentional, consistent, and reflective way throughout the project what they learned, how they grew as scholars and leaders, and how they met their proposed project objectives. 4 points – The chapter assessed in an intentional and reflective way what they learned and how they grew as scholars and leaders. 3 points – The chapter assessed in a reflective way what they learned and how they grew as scholars and leaders. 2 points – The chapter assessed in a minimal way what they learned and how they grew as scholars and leaders. 1 point – The chapter did not appear to assess what they learned and how they grew as scholars and leaders.

POINTS APPLICATION The judges can apply points as they see fit. They do not have to use just the points listed on the rubric. They can apply points, such as 4.5 or 4.25 if they wish. The difference between the chapters on the stage and the runner-up is often fractions of a point. GRAB EVERY POINT YOU CAN! Spelling and Grammar can be your downfall.

SOURCES Purdue OWL

TRAA CONTACTS www.ptk.org www.txptk.org
Alumni Review – First Come, First Served Send any Hallmark essays to our single point of contact:

College Project: Assess & Reflect
★ ★ ★ Three Star Level

WHERE DOES THE COLLEGE PROJECT COME FROM?
Star Level Three of the Five Star Development Program Implement a College Project which is determined by the chapter and college president or other administrator: Mentor incoming freshmen Help with college graduation Serve as college ambassadors Promote community college completion Other

COLLEGE PROJECT: Purpose
To establish and/or strengthen a supportive relationship between the chapter and the college administration. The chapter should meet with the college president (or other appropriate administrator) to determine the College Project, which can be anything that supports the college’s mission.

COLLEGE PROJECT: Components
Preparation Leadership Development Cooperative Effort/Communication Impact

Wednesday January 16, 2019 at 5:00pm CST
DEADLINE Wednesday January 16, at 5:00pm CST

BIG CHANGES & SOME TIPS Use Modern Language Association (MLA) format
Use Oxford Commas (Serial Comma) If using an acronym, spell it out and use parenthesis the first time, then use the acronym This is only a chapter and administration project, no piggy-backing on another project There isn’t a need to use titles for individuals Everything that the chapter and college administration does in this project should be intentional Include process steps throughout

WORD COUNT 1,200 Words 4 Questions – This is a change! In previous years it was 5 questions. Less questions, same word count. No word limit is given to each question, but is 1,200 words for the entire application.

This is about the College Project And it’s all about the process.
KEEP IN MIND This is about the College Project And it’s all about the process.

QUESTION 0: Project Topic
Include a brief project topic heading.

QUESTION 1: Project Description
Briefly describe your College Project and who from the chapter and the college administration was involved in determining it?

QUESTION 1: TIPS Is your college mission in your essay? It should be.
Brief means 300 words or less. Ensure that components Preparation and Cooperative Effort/Communications are included in your response. What research took place before the meeting with administrators?

QUESTION 2: Objectives & Process
Summarize your objectives for the College Project and the process by which the chapter and college administration set these objectives. Talk about all of your meetings, there should be several. What research took place? Include evidence that this project included joint decisions between the chapter and college administration

QUESTION 2: TIPS Ensure that components Preparation and Cooperative Effort/Communication are included in your response.

QUESTION 3: Planning Process
Describe the planning process and strategies developed to complete the College Project.

QUESTION 3: TIPS Ensure that Leadership Development and Impact are included in your response. How did your project impact the goals (mission statement) of the college? Provide evidence of membership and administration involvement.

QUESTION 4: Outcomes & Lessons
What were the quantitative and qualitative outcomes of your project, including the lessons learned by your chapter members and others?

QUESTION 4: TIPS Ensure that Cooperative Effort/Communication is included in your response. What were the qualitative and quantitative outcomes and how did they impact the goals (mission statement) the team set? Provide evidence. Include how the relationship between the chapter and administration was strengthened.

RUBRIC POINTS STRUCTURE

COMPOENENTS Preparation – 20 Points Leadership Development – 20 Points
Cooperative Effort/Communication – 20 Points Impact – 20 Points Presentation – 5 Points Total Points: 85

PREPARATION Worth 20 Points
8 points – Chapter made it a top priority to meet with appropriate administrator(s) to discuss College Project objectives before project was determined. 4 points – Clear, compelling evidence that the chapter leaders researched the college’s mission and/or strategic priorities prior to meeting with college administrators to determine project. 4 points – Strong evidence that the project was a JOINT decision between chapter and college. (Chapter did NOT implement their own project without input/approval from college.) 4 points – The entry provides explicit details of how this project helps fulfill college’s mission/priorities.

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT Worth 20 Points
8 points – Substantive details provided of intentional teamwork between chapter and college officials. Details show members were strategic and thorough in organizing and implementing the project. 4 points – Clear evidence of intentional activities to improve members’ leadership skills. (What skills or abilities were necessary to carry out College Project and how did chapter members prepare themselves for these? (workshops, collaborating with experts, researching issue, etc.) 4 points – Compelling examples given with specific details of members fulfilling significant leadership roles in implementing the project. 4 points – Explicit details given of chapter’s most important planning steps to ensure successful project. Evidence shows members were strategic and thorough in organizing and implementing the project.

COOPERATIVE EFFORT/COMMUNICATIONS Worth 20 Points
12 possible points - Strong evidence members communicated effectively and continuously with college administration/officials (details on how communication was carried out -- through advisor, through updates, monthly meetings, follow-up with another administrator/department, etc.) 4 points - Before the project began to reach agreement on project goals/strategies 4 points - During the project (progress updates) 4 points - After the project was completed (results of project) 4 points – Strong evidence of chapter members’ flexibility and/or creativity in addressing any opportunities, challenges or obstacles in implementing project 4 points – Specific details provided of chapter seeking college’s input in addressing any opportunities, challenges or obstacles in implementing the project.

IMPACT Worth 20 Points 4 points – Clear, compelling evidence of project’s outcomes through quantitative data. (Examples could be amount of scholarship created, money donated, number of people reached through a project, number of audience members at an event, etc.) 4 points – Clear, compelling evidence of project’s outcomes through qualitative data. (intangible benefits/outcomes that can be through meaningful interactions such as survey comments, reactions by those who benefited from a project, description of how project filled a need/wish list item, personal growth experienced by participants, etc.) 4 points – Clearly articulated how these outcomes addressed the college’s goals for the project 4 points – Clearly articulated how chapter’s relationship with college was strengthened 4 points – Details provided meaningful reflection of how chapter members grew in knowledge and as scholar-servant-leaders throughout the project.

PRESENTATION Worth 5 Points
5 points – Spelling and grammar are faultless. 3 points – A few errors in spelling and/or grammar. 1 point – Spelling and/or grammar errors throughout.

WORKSHOP INFORMATION Honors in Action & College Project Assess and Reflect Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association of Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society of Two-Year Colleges Created: Fall 2018 Last Revised: Fall 2018 This text was created for the members of the Alpha Gamma Pi Chapter of Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society of the Two-Year College. The Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association of Phi Theta Kappa presents this workshop to continue to uphold the purpose of Phi Theta Kappa and provide continuing fellowship by supporting the people, programs, and the priorities of Phi Theta Kappa, as well as Austin Community College. The Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association hopes that this workshop will inspire your sense of leadership and encourage you to take a step towards expanding your educational goals. Jennifer Palmer-Lee – President Katherine Lyon – Treasurer Garrett Staas – Parliamentarian Jeannie Schaefer – Vice President Jon-Mikel Pearson – Secretary © 2013 Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association © 2017 Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association © 2018 Alpha Gamma Pi Alumni Association

Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Honors in Action: Assess & Reflect"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback