Spring 1999
Spring 1998
Spring 1997
Spring 1996
| EVALUATION
The major component of the class is developing and persuasively presenting, both in writing and in oral presentation using a presentation software package (Microsoft's PowerPoint), a thoughtful, in-depth analysis of an issue challenging education. Since you will implement this component as part of a team, each member will receive the grade assigned to the team. It is imperative that you work well as a team so that readers of your issue analysis paper will not be able to detect that the paper was not a single-authored work. Your presentation should be so well-rehearsed that all phases of the presentation are well done. The other course components for evaluation consist of (a) one scanning abstract and (b) an issue analysis team critique of one issue analysis paper. The scanning abstracts are important in assisting us to identify the critical issues that we want to work on this semester; the critiques are important to classmates in the development of their written communication skills (and offer you a chance to hone your writing skills as well). More importantly, since the content of the course revolves around the issue analysis papers, writing critiques provides you with further opportunities to delve deeply into issues challenging education. Note that I and the issue analysis teams will critique the first draft of your issue analysis paper and that I will critique the first draft of your abstract. Use these critiques to revise your papers. You are under no obligation to accept every comment or recommendation (substantive or editorial) as valid and revise your paper accordingly. Instead, if you do not agree with a comment, you can ignore it, but do view the comment as a signal that someone who has taken a good deal of time and energy to think through your paper and provide you with the benefit of their effort did not get your point. Think of how you could revise so that the critic and other readers may see your point more clearly. In other words, use the critiques to help you improve your argument. Please know that I will give each of your drafts my best shot as a critic, just as if I were reviewing my own writing. This does not mean that I am necessarily correct; I may miss errors, or may suggest changes in your final paper that I did not address in your first draft. In addition, many of my comments may be a matter of stylistic preference. Remember, I am attempting to help you bring forth your best work in revision. It is important that we go over my critique of your work face-to-face. You are responsible for the revision, which I will critique and evaluate according the criteria below. Criteria for Evaluating Scanning Abstracts
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Criteria for Evaluating Scanning Abstracts
Criteria for Evaluating Issue Analysis Papers
| Possible Points (1-5) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | TOTAL |
| Content (X8) | Description of the issue, its background, context, forces driving it, where it is going, its implications and what we should do about it generally lack clarity. | Is generally well done, but some of the elements of the issue analysis lack clarity. | Analysis is clear and compelling. | |||
| Narrative (X3) | Paper lacks clear, concise narrative. Professional literature in print or electronic form is rarely referenced. | Paper conveys basic theme. More information is needed for the reader to have complete understanding of theme. | Paper has concise narrative that clearly communicates an understanding of the topic and contains useful and appropriate references to online and print literature. | |||
| Organization (X2) | Paper is disorganized; does not focus on topic. | Paper is incomplete. It lacks a well-developed introduction, body, and conclusion. Paragraphs are organized with topic sentence, support for the idea expressed in the topic sentence and conclusion. Transitions and sequencing among paragraphs and sections are attempted but need improvement. | Paper contains a clear introduction and conclusion. The body of the paper is logically ordered. Individual paragraphs include topic sentences, development of topic ideas with facts and illustrations, and conclusions. Transitions from one topic to the next are logical and smooth. Paper follows format specified in the syllabus. | |||
| Sentences (X2) | Paper contains multiple run-on sentences or sentence fragments. | Paper contains occasional errors in sentence structure. There is minimal variety in sentence structure or length. Sentences use passive construction. | Sentences are complete. They are varied in length and structure. Sentences use active construction. | |||
| Mechanics (X2) | Paper has errors related to spelling, word choice, pronoun agreement, possessives, parallelism, split infinitives, punctuation (e.g. failure to use commas after introductory adverbial clauses; failure to join two independent clauses with a semi-colon or comma-plus-conjunction) | Paper has occasional errors related to the same. (See column 1.) | Spelling, punctuation, grammar, and word choice are correct. | |||
| APA* (X1) | Headings, subheadings, in-text citations, and reference list are grossly inconsistent with APA guidelines. | Paper has occasional mistakes in APA documentation and references consistent with APA guidelines. | Paper conforms to APA in-text and reference guidelines. | |||
| Explanatory note: The horizontal axis represents the possible points (1-5) in each vertical section. The bold figure listed beneath each category designates the emphasis given to that category. In order to figure out your grade, multiply your points in each category by that category's weight (e.g. Mechanics: if points=3, then 3 X 2(weight) yields 6 total points). Then add up these points for your total score. | ||||||
I suggest that you begin each critique with pointing out your overall evaluation of the major strengths and weaknesses of the paper. Note that each issue analysis paper is written according to a specified outline. Are there any significant omissions or excesses in coverage? Please note where material is weak, incomplete, or hard to follow. Is a section too long? Too short? How can it be made more useful? Have the authors missed an important aspect of the issue? Is it clear that they've done a thorough search of the literature? Remember: the purpose of the critique is to be helpful to your colleagues in presenting a stronger paper. This is hard work, but is a critical skill for you in your work as an educational leader.
Criteria for Evaluating Issue Analysis Critiques| Criterion | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Usefulness (x3) | The comments offered include little or no helpful information on improving the paper, and may be actually counterproductive. They show no real understanding of the paper or desire to improve it. | The comments offered are relevant to the paper reviewed, and include information on both content and format. They show a close reading of the paper and an understanding of its goal, and are geared to help the authors achieve that goal. | |||
| Content Evaluation (x2) | Comments indicate that the reviewer has little knowledge or understanding of the content. Suggestions are misleading. | Comments demonstrate that the reviewer has insight and knowledge about the content of the paper. | |||
| Comprehensibility (x2) | Comments are difficult to understand; it is unclear what they refer to, what they suggest, or why they suggest it. | Comments are easily understood; it is clear what they refer to and what suggestions they offer and why. | |||
| Mechanics Analysis (x2) | Comments show a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of good grammar, structure, and/or spelling. | Comments show a good grasp of any spelling and grammar mistakes in the paper, and offer useful suggestions on how to correct them, including references to the APA manual and to Strunk's manual. | |||
| APA Style Analysis (x1) | Comments show a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge about APA Style. | Comments show a knowledge of APA Style and any citation problems present in the paper. |
Criteria for
Evaluating Presentations
Possible Points: |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Presentation Style (x2) Personal appearance (posture, expression); speaking (articulation, projection); energy, interest, audience contact |
Presenter appears slovenly or uninterested, has little or no energy, does not have eye contact with audience, is difficult to hear or understand. | Presenter appears professional and lively, articulates and projects well, is interested in the topic, engages in frequent eye contact with the audience, holds both attention and interest. | |||
| Organization (x2) Opening and concluding remarks, flow of ideas, reasoning |
Opening is absent or difficult to grasp, topics seem disjointed or rambling, with no clear direction, reasoning is faulty or unclear, closing fails to wrap up topic or make conclusions. | Opening is concise and informative, sections flow together well, connections between topics are easy to follow, reasoning is sound, closing wraps up topic well and states conclusions clearly. | |||
| Content (x2) Ideas (novelty, clarity), value of content, use of examples |
Ideas are not new or interesting, and show a lack of understanding of the scholarship to date on the subject, content has little or no value to the discipline, and examples are absent or seem not to support the thesis. | Ideas are interesting and show a new take on the subject, content shows value to the discipline and is potentially useful, examples are drawn that clearly show whence the ideas have come and their potential uses. | |||
| Use of Media (x2) Linking media with speaking; linking media with other media (if applicable); Knowledgeable handling of media; general appearance of media materials (legibility, layout) |
Media used are not properly integrated with speaking, timing is off, slides are out of order, presenter shows lack of knowledge in the preparation or handling of media used, media are illegible or poorly laid-out, and distract attention from the topic. | Media used are well integrated with speech and with each other, presenter shows expertise in preparing and using media, materials are legible, attractive, and well laid-out, and are supportive rather than distracting. | |||
| Mechanics (x1) Grammar, gestures, pace |
Presenter shows poor grasp of language or structure, uses distracting gestures or mannerisms, speaks too quickly or too slowly; shows poor preparation. | Presenter shows good grasp of language (grammar, sentence structure), uses gestures effectively to support ideas rather than distract, pace is neither too fast nor too slow; presenter shows good preparation. |
The specific evaluation components and their relative weight are as follows:
| Component | Weight |
| Scanning abstract | 10% |
| Issue analysis paper | 45% |
| Issue analysis presentation | 30% |
| Issue analysis critique | 15% |
Grades will follow the Graduate School's definition: a "P" represents that quality of work normally expected of graduate students at this university; an "H" will be awarded for genuinely superior performance; an "L" represents an assessment that the quality of work examined is below expectations; an "F" represents an assessment of doubt that the student can improve the quality of work to the point of successful completion of a degree program. Usually, a student receiving a grade below "P" will be given the option of revising it to improve the grade to "P." Incompletes will not convert to a grade higher than "P" unless the incomplete is based upon illness or similarly unpredictable personal or family event.
I know that you are concerned about grades, since grades have been emphasized so much in your education heretofore. Remember, however, that grades are only a rough indicator of achievement, not achievement itself. Please do not fixate on grades. Focus on using this course, me, and your colleagues in developing your competency in accessing, analyzing, and communicating information, skills that every effective educational leader must have to be successful. Grades will follow.