masters and specialist handbook - st. cloud state university · defend your thesis or portfolio)....

St. Cloud State University

Masters and Specialist

Handbook: Meeting Procedures, Graduation

Requirements, and Scoring Rubrics

Educational Leadership and Administration

Revised: May 12, 2011

2

Table of Contents

Page

Masters and Specialist Preliminary Meeting Checklist ......................................................................3

Masters and Specialist Final Meeting Checklist .................................................................................4

School of Graduate Studies Checklist ................................................................................................5

Checklist for All Graduate Students ...................................................................................................6

Additional Checklist for Plan A: Thesis and Field Study ...................................................................6

Rubric for Portfolio Proposal .............................................................................................................7

Rubric for Completed Portfolio ..........................................................................................................8

Rubric for Thesis/Field Study (proposal) ...........................................................................................9

Rubric for Thesis/Field Study (completed) ........................................................................................12

Masters Competencies Assessment Rubric (Pre/Post) .......................................................................16

3

Masters and Specialist Preliminary Meeting Checklist: (thesis, field study, or portfolio)

Applied for the EDAD program (and been accepted) and have a Program of Study (POS) form

on file in the office of the School of Graduate Studies.

Requested three faculty members to serve on your POS.

o Two from EDAD (one is your advisor) and one from outside of the department

o Ask your advisor for a list of faculty (names and emails) from outside of the

department if you are not familiar with other faculty outside of EDAD

o You must have a proposal meeting the semester before you plan to graduate (i.e.,

defend your thesis or portfolio).

Have thesis/field study/portfolio proposal approved by Advisor before you go forward and

schedule preliminary meeting.

Provided POS committee with a range of meeting dates and times from which to select.

Called EDAD and asked secretary to reserve a “smart classroom” for that time and date.

Called Graduate Studies and informed them of POS committee members (indicating your

advisor).

o Have Graduate Studies send the signature sheet to your advisor a week before

meeting.

Reconfirmed – a week before the meeting – time, date and location of the meeting to all POS

committee members.

Send thesis/field study proposal or electronic portfolio link to all committee members at least

two weeks in advance.

Prepared a very brief agenda to handout along with proposal or portfolio plan (see portfolio

components below). For thesis/field study, the agenda covers chapters 1-3.

o Introduction

o Career map

o Three competencies with philosophy statements and two artifacts per competency

o List of Master courses

o Comment/suggestions

Received official POS committee approval or suggested modifications of proposal or

portfolio.

Confirmed that advisor forwarded the POS committee signature form along with either

portfolio proposal documents or thesis field study proposal

4

Final Meeting:

Have Advisor approve final portfolio or thesis/field study before you go forward.

Provided POS committee with a range of dates and times from which to select.

Called EDAD and asked secretary to reserve a “smart classroom” for that time and date.

Called Graduate Studies and informed them of POS committee members (indicating your

advisor).

o Have Graduate Studies send the signature sheet to your advisor a week before

meeting.

Send thesis/field study proposal or electronic portfolio link to all committee members at least

two weeks in advance.

A week before the meeting - reconfirmed time, date and location of the meeting to all POS

committee members.

Prepared a very brief agenda to handout along with completed thesis/field study or electronic

portfolio.

o Introduction

o Career map

o Professional development plan

o Thirteen competencies with philosophy statements and two artifacts per competency

o List of Master courses

o Comment/suggestions

POS committee approved your final product or made suggested modifications.

After committee has approved final electronic portfolio, burn copies for advisor and committee

members or see additional checklist on following pages for thesis and field study.

o Revisions made on thesis and field study and approved by advisor

o For thesis/field study need committee signatures on all approval sheets (bond paper)

Advisor forwarded the final signature form to graduate studies.

Applied for graduation to ensure degree is posted on transcript. The form is located at

http//:www.stcloudstate.edu/graduatestudies/forms/current.asp

o If you have questions on your degree completion status, please call 320.308.2114

Note: If you plan to go on for administrative licensure (6th year) submit the form “Change of

Graduate Program” located at the web address listed above.

5

School of Graduate Studies Checklist:

Applications for Graduation or Completion:

Specialist, Master’s and Sixth Year Program: Filed an application for graduation accompanied

by a $20 non-refundable processing fee at the beginning of the semester in which the work for the

degree is anticipated to be completed.

Graduate Certificate: File an application for completion with the Graduate Studies Office.

Deadline dates are the same as those for application for graduation as listed in the academic

calendar and in each semester’s class schedule.

Specialist or Master’s Degree

Submitted an application for graduation accompanied by a $20 non-refundable processing fee

was submitted at the beginning of the semester which the degree is to be granted

Completed and passed all courses required on the approved program. All changes must be

substantiated by an approved petition.

Maintained a 3.0 (B) average or greater in the major, in the total program, and in all graduate

courses at St. Cloud State University.

Completed and passed the required final examination(s); written, oral, or both.

Submitted three approved copies of their Thesis, Field Study, Creative Work, or Starred

Paper(s) to the Graduate Studies Office for binding along with the required binding fee.

Submitted two additional abstracts by those completing a Thesis or Field Study.

Conferring of Specialist or Master’s Degree

Attended commencement exercises (optional, but encouraged to participate)

Attended commencement (optional, but encouraged to participate)

Note: Diplomas for Specialist and master’s degree programs will be mailed by the Office of

Records and Registration to the address on the application for graduation approximately eight

weeks after the close of the semester. A transcript with the degree posted upon it should be

available through the Office of Records and Registration approximately three weeks after the end of

the semester in which the student graduated.

6

Checklist for All Graduate Students

Completed all courses on the Approved Program Form within the seven-year time limit for

completion of the program.

Requested a current transcript from the Office of Records and Registration.

Checked transcript to determine all course work is completed.

Completed and passed all courses on the Approved Program Form.

Made up and submitted incomplete grades to the instructor.

Achieved a 3.0 grade point average or greater in the major, the total program, and the overall

graduate courses attempted (a 3.25 grade point average required for Specialist in Educational

Administration).

Fulfilled the residence requirement.

Completed a Final Written Comprehensive Examination for Plans A, B, or C if required.

Submitted all final copies (except Professional Project/Portfolio) on 100% cotton paper for

binding along with a $9.00 binding fee.

Additional Checklist for Plan A: Thesis and Field Study

Submitted four review copies of the field study or thesis to the School of Graduate Studies by

the appropriate deadline.

Scheduled final oral exams during the last week of the semester.

Submitted, after final oral examination, a minimum of three final copies of your field study or

thesis by the appropriate deadline.

o Signatures of committee required on each approval page.

o The thesis or field study is registered in the School of Graduate Studies for binding.

o If a bound copy is desired, additional copy submitted to the School of Graduate Studies.

o Two additional signed copies of the abstract required for further distribution by the School

of Graduate Studies.

o Abstract required for Field Study and Thesis.

Electronic Portfolio Proposal Rubric

Criteria

1

Unacceptable

2

Acceptable

3

Excellent Presentation (professional look of

Efolio; oral presentation; links work

properly)

Presentation lacks evidence of

preparation and is disorganized.

Efolio is not clearly organized;

contains many errors; not

professional in appearance.

Presentation is organized.

Efolio is organized and contains

some errors but is otherwise

reasonably professional in

appearance. A few links do not

work.

Presentation is well organized

and has depth. Efolio contains

very few errors; is readable and

very professional in

appearance. All links work

properly.

Philosophies (three)

(values and beliefs about core

competencies with APA citations)

Philosophies are not included or

are extremely weak; no evidence

of scholarly or reflective thought;

appears to be hastily written. No

references or citations.

Philosophies are present with

good evidence of reflective

thought and scholarship;

contains some references and

citations

Philosophies are present and

very well written; have strong

evidence of reflective and/or

scholarly thought with

references and citations.

Career map

(major events or experiences that

shaped the professional development

of the candidate)

No career map submitted. Career map is present and

reasonably professional. Most

events and experiences

documented.

Career map is presented with

major events and experiences

documents in relation to

professional development

Core competencies (three) and

Artifacts (two for each

competency)

(Selection of three competencies and

a reflective statement linking each

artifact with the competency)

Competencies have not been

selected; artifacts are missing and

no reflective statement.

Competencies have been

selected; at least one quality

artifact is present for each

competency. One or more

reflective statements missing.

Competencies have been

selected; two or more artifacts

are present with reflective

statements for each. Artifacts

are of high quality.

List of Courses

(courses listed from the candidate’s

program of study for the masters

degree)

No list of courses submitted. List of courses submitted and

presented in a reasonably

professional manner.

List of courses submitted and

presented in a very professional

manner.

Name of Candidate: Score:

Name of Committee member:

Comments:

8

Completed Masters Electronic Portfolio Rubric

Criteria

1

Unacceptable

2

Acceptable

3

Excellent Presentation (professional look of

Efolio; oral presentation; links work

properly)

Presentation lacks evidence of

preparation and is disorganized.

Efolio is not clearly organized;

contains many errors; not

professional in appearance.

Presentation is organized. Efolio is

organized and contains some errors but

is otherwise reasonably professional in

appearance. A few links do not work.

Presentation is well organized and

has depth. Efolio contains very few

errors; is readable and very

professional in appearance. All links

work properly.

Philosophies (all 13)

(values and beliefs about core

competencies with APA citations)

Philosophies are not included or

are extremely weak; no evidence

of scholarly or reflective thought;

appears to be hastily written. No

references or citations.

Philosophies are present with good

evidence of reflective thought and

scholarship; contains some references

and citations

Philosophies are present and very

well written; have strong evidence of

reflective and/or scholarly thought

with references and citations.

Career map and Résumé

(major events or experiences that

shaped the professional development of

the candidate)

No career map or résumé

submitted.

Career map and résumé are present and

reasonably professional. Most events

and experiences documented.

Career map and résumé are

presented with major events and

experiences documents in relation to

professional development

Core competencies (all 13) and

Artifacts (two for each competency)

(Selection of thirteen competencies and

a reflective statement linking each

artifact with the competency)

Competencies have not been

selected; artifacts are missing and

no reflective statement.

Competencies have been selected; at

least one quality artifact is present for

each competency. One or more

reflective statements missing.

Competencies have been selected;

two or more artifacts are present

with reflective statements for each.

Artifacts are of high quality.

List of Courses

(courses listed from the candidate’s

program of study for the masters

degree)

No list of courses submitted. List of courses submitted and presented

in a reasonably professional manner.

List of courses submitted and

presented in a very professional

manner.

Agenda, Efolio, Disk Copy, and link

(Candidate has prepared an agenda and

has provided a disk for committee and

efolio link)

Agenda and disk copy/link not

submitted.

Agenda and disk copy/link submitted

and reasonably presented.

Agenda and disk copy/link

submitted. Materials are presented in

a very professional manner.

Name of Candidate: Score:

Name of Committee member:

Comments:

Thesis/Field Study Proposal Rubric

The rubric detailed below is modeled from Wilson & Morrow (2000). This rubric will be used by

your MS committee to evaluate your thesis. Criteria under chapters one through three will be used

to evaluate the thesis proposal for the preliminary meeting.

Topic

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Insignificant to student and

committee

Significant to the student,

thesis committee and program

of study

Significant to the field of

scholars in this area

Scope too narrow to warrant

six semester hours

Scope sufficient to warrant six

semester hours

Scope warrant more than six

semester hours

Project is not feasible given

resources and timeline

Project is feasible given


Project is extremely feasible

given resources and timeline

Chapter One (Introduction)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Mismatch between problem and

research questions/hypotheses

Some relationship between

problem and research

questions/hypotheses

Clear relationship between


question/hypotheses

Superficial treatment of problem Adequate treatment of problem,

no obvious admissions

Demonstrates clear

understanding of problem

through inclusion of multiple

perspectives and placement of

problem in context

Missing one or more of the

following components:

introduction, statement of the

problem, purpose for the study,

objectives, assumptions,

delimitations, hypotheses,

research questions, definition of

terms, and human subjects

approval

Most of the components were

included

All components included and

clearly described

10

Chapter Two (Review of Related Literature)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Fewer than 15 sources 15 to 25 sources More than 25 sources

Includes only opinion and

application articles

Includes primarily research and

synthesis articles

Includes a variety of high quality

sources, including articles from

peer-reviewed journals, with

emphasis on research and

synthesis

No clear organization Well organized Organizational pattern

demonstrates understanding of

prior research on the topic

Variables not discussed Independent and dependent

variables discussed

Independent and dependent

variables thoroughly analyzed

and discussed

Review of literature is not current All recently published relevant

articles cited

Up-to-the-minute journal,

internet sources cited

Chapter Three (Methods)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Mismatch between research

methods and


Uses accepted standard research

methodology

Shows thorough understanding of

research methodology used

including assumptions of

statistical tests

No discussion of instrumentation

noted

Instrumentation discussed Thoughtful explanation of

instruments used for

measurement and/or observation

Participation and sampling not

discussed

Participation and sampling

discussed


thoroughly discussed

Threats to external validity not

discussed

Threats to external validity

discussed



Data collection procedures

description sketchy

Data collection procedures fully

described


described well enough to be

easily replicated

Pilot test not discussed Pilot test of some procedures

conducted

Pilot test of all procedures,

including analysis conducted

Statistical and analytical

procedures not discussed


procedures discussed


procedures discussed well

enough to be easily replicated

11

General

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Contains many spelling and

grammatical errors

Contains few spelling and

grammatical errors

Contains no spelling or

grammatical errors, demonstrates

creative use of language

Does not follow APA style Follows APA style Conscientiously follows APA

style

Does not follow SCSU thesis

guidelines

Follows SCSU thesis guidelines Conscientiously follows SCSU

thesis guidelines

Includes sketchy descriptions Includes adequate descriptions Uses rich descriptive technique

where appropriate

Organizational plan inconsistent Good organizational plan Organizational plan enhances

project and promotes reading

comprehension

Does not maintain focus on

research problem

Maintains focus on research

problem

Enhances focus of research

problem

Minimum score = 48 points (no score less than a 2 in each criteria)

Total score out of a maximum of 72 points:___________________

12

Completed Thesis/Field Study Rubric

Topic

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Insignificant to student and

committee

Significant to the student,

thesis committee and program

of study

Significant to the field of

scholars in this area

Scope too narrow to warrant

six semester hours

Scope sufficient to warrant six

semester hours

Scope warrant more than six

semester hours

Project is not feasible given


Project is feasible given


Project is extremely feasible

given resources and timeline

Prefatory Material

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

No abstract provided Abstract (100-200 words)

provided

Abstract (300-400 words)

provided

No table of contents provided Table of contents provided Table of contents complete

with all subheadings provided

No list of tables provided List of tables provided List of tables with complete

titles and page numbers

provided

No list of figures provided List of figures provided List of figures with complete

titles and page numbers

provided

13

Chapter One (Introduction)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Mismatch between problem

and research


Some relationship between



Clear relationship between


question/hypotheses

Superficial treatment of

problem

Adequate treatment of

problem, no obvious

admissions

Demonstrates clear

understanding of problem

through inclusion of multiple

perspectives and placement of

problem in context

Missing one or more of the

following components:

introduction, statement of the

problem, purpose for the

study, objectives,

assumptions, delimitations,

hypotheses, research

questions, definition of terms,

and human subjects approval

Most of the components were

included

All components included and

clearly described

Chapter Two (Review of Related Literature)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Fewer than 15 sources 15 to 25 sources More than 25 sources

Includes only opinion and

application articles

Includes primarily research

and synthesis articles

Includes a variety of high

quality sources, including

articles from peer-reviewed

journals, with emphasis on

research and synthesis

No clear organization Well organized Organizational pattern

demonstrates understanding of

prior research on the topic

Variables not discussed Independent and dependent

variables discussed

Independent and dependent

variables thoroughly analyzed

and discussed

Review of literature is not

current

All recently published relevant

articles cited

Up-to-the-minute journal,

internet sources cited

14

Chapter Three (Methods)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Mismatch between research

methods and


Uses accepted standard

research methodology

Shows thorough

understanding of research

methodology used including

assumptions of statistical tests

No discussion of

instrumentation noted

Instrumentation discussed Thoughtful explanation of

instruments used for

measurement and/or

observation

Participation and sampling not

discussed


discussed



Threats to external validity not

discussed


discussed




description sketchy


fully described


described well enough to be

easily replicated

Pilot test not discussed Pilot test of some procedures

conducted

Pilot test of all procedures,

including analysis conducted


procedures not discussed


procedures discussed


procedures discussed well

enough to be easily replicated

Chapter Four (Results)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Inaccurate or incomplete

analysis

Adequate analysis Insightful analysis and

interpretation of data

Lacks adequate narrative

description of findings

Includes adequate narrative


Clear and complete narrative


Lacks appropriate charts

and/or tables

Tables and charts adequately

support narrative

Tables and charts substantially

enhance narrative

15

Chapter Five (Summary, Conclusions, Discussion, Limitations, and

Recommendations)

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Lacks summary Summary adequately covers all

components of the project

Clear, concise, and thorough

summary, publication quality

Lacks conclusion or conclusion

not supported by data

Conclusions supported by data Insightful conclusions, well

supported by data

Discussion is not included or

lacks relevance

Discussion is present and is

moderately relevant to the field

of study or practitioners

Discussion is insightful and well-

thought out; tied to current

practice and issues

Limitations not addressed Superficial treatment of

limitations

Insightful treatment of limitations

Results not tied to review of

related literature

Results tied to review of related

literature

Results compared and contrasted

with findings of prior researchers

and thoroughly discussed

Lacks recommendations for

further research and practice or

recommendation are consistent

with findings

Recommendations for further

research and practice are

consistent the findings

Thorough exploration of ideas

for further research and practice

General

Unsatisfactory

1

Satisfactory

2

Exemplary

3

Contains many spelling and

grammatical errors

Contains few spelling and

grammatical errors

Contains no spelling or

grammatical errors, demonstrates

creative use of language

Does not follow APA style Follows APA style Conscientiously follows APA

style

Does not follow SCSU thesis

guidelines

Follows SCSU thesis guidelines Conscientiously follows SCSU

thesis guidelines

Includes sketchy descriptions Includes adequate descriptions Uses rich descriptive technique

where appropriate

Organizational plan inconsistent Good organizational plan Organizational plan enhances

project and promotes reading

comprehension

Does not maintain focus on

research problem

Maintains focus on research

problem

Enhances focus of research

problem

Minimum score = 72 points (no score less than a 2 in each criteria)

Total score out of a maximum of 108 points:___________________

16

Educational Administration Masters Core Competencies: Pre and Post Self-Assessment

Name: Candidate Signature: (print name)

Pre Assessment Score: Date:

Post Assessment Score: Date:

Minnesota State Core Competencies: Pre Assessment Post Assessment

A. Leadership =

B. Organizational Management =

C. Diversity Leadership =

D. Policy and Law =

E. Political Influence and Governance =

F. Communication =

G. Community Relations =

H. Curriculum Planning and Development =

I. Instructional Management =

J. Human Resource Management =

K. Values and Ethics of Leadership =

L. Judgment and Problem Analysis =

M. Safety and Security =

Total Points: 78 =

Revised: November 25, 2009

17

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale

Minor Moderate Exemplary

Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are negligible; not evident

Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are developing or emerging

Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are commendable or excellent

1 2 3 4 5 6

A. Leadership:

1. demonstrate leadership by

collaboratively assessing and improving

culture, and climate;

2. demonstrate leadership by providing

purpose and direction for individuals and

groups;

3. model shared leadership and decision-

making strategies;

4. demonstrate an understanding of issues

affecting education;

5. through a visioning process, formulate

strategic plans and goals with staff and

community;

6. set priorities in the context of stakeholder

needs;

7. serve as a spokesperson for the welfare

of all learners in a multicultural context;

8. understand how education is impacted by

local, state, national, and international

events;

9. demonstrate the ability to facilitate and

motivate others;

10. demonstrate the ability to implement

change or educational reform.

18

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale


Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are negligible; not evident

Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are developing or emerging

Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are commendable or excellent

1 2 3 4 5 6

B. Organizational Management

1. demonstrate an understanding of

organizational systems;

2. define and use processes for gathering,

analyzing, managing and using data to

plan and make decisions for program

evaluation;

3. plan and schedule personal and

organizational work, establish procedures

to regulate activities and projects, and

delegate and empower others at

appropriate levels;

4. demonstrate the ability to analyze need

and allocate personnel and material

resources;

5. develop and manage budgets and

maintain accurate fiscal records;

6. demonstrate and understanding of

facilities development, planning and

management;

7. understand and use technology as a

management tool.

19

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale

Minor Moderate Exemplary Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and

dispositions are negligible; not evident Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and

dispositions are developing or emerging Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and dispositions

are commendable or excellent

1 2 3 4 5 6

C. Diversity Leadership

1. demonstrate an understanding and

recognition of the significance of

diversity, and respond to the needs of

diverse learners;

2. create and monitor a positive learning

environment for all students;

3. create and monitor a positive working

environment for all staff;

4. promote sensitivity of diversity

throughout the school community;

5. demonstrate the ability to adapt

educational programming to the needs of

diverse constituencies;

20

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale





1 2 3 4 5 6 D. Policy and Law

1. develop, adjust, and implement policy to

meet local, state, and federal requirements

and constitutional provisions, standards,

and regulatory applications;

2. recognize and apply standards of care

involving civil and criminal liability for

negligence, harassment, and intentional

torts;

3. demonstrate an understanding of state,

federal, and case law governing general

education, special education, and

community education.

E. Political Influence and Governance

1. exhibit an understanding of school

districts as a political system, including

governance models;

2. demonstrate the ability to involve

stakeholders in the development of

educational policy;

3. understand the role and coordination of

social agencies and human services;

4. demonstrate the ability to align

constituencies in support of priorities and

build coalitions for programmatic and

financial support.

21

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale



dispositions are developing or emerging Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and

dispositions are commendable or excellent

1 2 3 4 5 6

F. Communication

1. formulate and carry out plans for internal

and external communications;

2. demonstrate facilitation skills;

3. recognize and apply an understanding of

individual and group behavior in normal

and stressful situations;

4. facilitate teamwork;

5. demonstrate an understanding of conflict

resolution and problem solving strategies;

6. make presentations that are clear and easy

to understand

7. respond, review, and summarize

information for groups

8. communicate appropriately (speaking,

listening, and writing) for different

audiences— students, teachers, parents,

community, and other stakeholders;

9. understand and utilize appropriate

communication technology.

22

G. Community Relations

1. articulate organizational purpose and

priorities to the community and media;

2. request and respond to community

feedback;

3. demonstrate the ability to build

community consensus;

4. relate political initiatives to stakeholders,

including parental involvement programs;

5. identify and interact with internal and

external publics;

6. understand and respond to the news

media;

7. promote a positive image of schools and

the school district;

8. monitor and address perceptions about

school-community issues;

9. demonstrate the ability to identify and

articulate critical community issues which

may impact local education.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale





1 2 3 4 5 6

23

H. Curriculum Planning and Development

1. demonstrate the ability to enhance

teaching and learning through curriculum

assessment and strategic planning for all

learners, including pre-K, elementary,

middle, junior high school, high school,

special education and adult levels;

2. demonstrate the ability to provide

planning and methods to anticipate trends

and educational implications;

3. demonstrate the ability to develop,

implement, and monitor procedures to

align, sequence, and articulate curriculum

and validate curricular procedures;

4. demonstrate the ability to identify

instructional objectives and use valid and

reliable performance indicators and

evaluative procedures to measure

performance outcomes;

5. appropriately use learning technologies;

6. demonstrate an understanding of

alternative instructional designs,

curriculum, behavior management, and

assessment accommodations and

modifications;

7. demonstrate an understanding of the

urgency of global competitiveness.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale





1 2 3 4 5 6

24

I. Instructional Management

1. demonstrate an understanding of research

of learning and instructional strategies;

2. describe and apply research and best

practices on integrating curriculum and

resources to help all learners achieve at

high levels;

3. demonstrate the ability to utilize data for

instructional decision making;

4. demonstrate the ability to design

appropriate assessment strategies for

measuring learner outcomes;

5. demonstrate the ability to implement

alternative instructional designs,

curriculum, behavior management, and

assessment accommodations and

modifications;

6. demonstrate the ability to be responsive to

the needs, interests and abilities of gifted

and talented students;

7. demonstrate the ability to identify

appropriate school structures and

resources for gifted and talented students;

8. demonstrate the ability to appropriately

use technology to support instruction.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale





1 2 3 4 5 6

25

J. Human Resource Management

1. demonstrate knowledge of effective

personnel recruitment, selection, and

retention;

2. demonstrate an understanding of staff

development to improve the performance

of all staff members;

3. demonstrate the ability to select and apply

appropriate models for supervision and

evaluation;

4. describe and demonstrate the ability to

apply the legal requirements for personnel

selection, development, retention, and

dismissal;

5. demonstrate understanding of

management responsibilities to act in

accordance with federal and state

constitutional provisions, statutory and

case law, regulatory applications toward

education, local rules, procedures and

directives governing human resource

management;

6. demonstrate understanding of labor

relations and collective bargaining;

7. demonstrate understanding of the

administration of employee contracts,

benefits, and financial accounts.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale





1 2 3 4 5 6

26

K. Values and Ethics of Leadership

1. demonstrate understanding of the role of

education in a democratic society;

2. demonstrate understanding of and model

democratic value systems, ethics, and

moral leadership;

3. demonstrate the ability to balance

complex community demands in the best

interest of learners; and

4. help learners grow and develop as caring,

informed citizens;

5. demonstrate understanding and

application of the Minnesota Board of

School Administrators Code of Ethics for

Administrators.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale


Candidate’s Knowledge, skills, and




1 2 3 4 5 6

27

L. Judgment and Problem Analysis

1. identify the elements of a problem

situation by analyzing relevant

information, framing issues, identifying

possible causes, and reframing possible

solutions;

2. demonstrate adaptability and conceptual

flexibility;

3. assist others in forming opinions about

problems and issues,

4. reach logical conclusions by making

quality, timely decisions based on

available information;

5. identify and give priority to significant

issues;

6. demonstrate understanding of and utilize

appropriate technology in problem

analysis;

7. demonstrate understanding of different

leadership and decision-making strategies,

including but not limited to collaborative

models, and model appropriately their

implementation.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale






1 2 3 4 5 6

28

H. Safety and Security

1. demonstrate the ability to develop and

implement policies and procedures for

safe and secure educational environments;

2. demonstrate the ability to formulate

safety and security plans to implement

security procedures including an

articulated emergency chain of

command, safety procedures required

by law, law enforcement assistance,

communication with the public, and

evacuation procedures;

3. demonstrate the ability to identify areas of

vulnerability associated with school buses,

buildings, and grounds and formulate a

plan to take corrective action;

4. demonstrate understanding of procedural

predictabilities and plan variations where

possible;

5. demonstrate the ability to develop plans

that connect every student with a school

adult, eliminate bullying and profiling and

implement recommended threat

assessment procedures.

Criteria

and

Descriptors

Rating Scale






1 2 3 4 5 6

masters and specialist handbook - st. cloud state university · defend your thesis or portfolio)....

Documents