Structured External Assignment: Action Research
District Leaders
This SEA serves as the beginning of your Dissertation in Practice. The identification of the contextual meaning of the Problem of Practice is the first step towards the Dissertation in Practice. The Problem of Practice is grounded in strong evidence, improvement science methodology, action research methodology and practice. It is shareable and it clearly describes what is happening in the instructional core while being connected to a systemic issue of the school/district theory of action with intended benefits identified, meaningful, insightful and innovative. The Problem of Practice is high leverage and specific of the significant impact to learning. To enhance this practical work, the candidate includes information, activities, tools and techniques, stakeholders involved and analyses to guide the Dissertation in Practice. There is a format or genre that is more applicable to your Problem of Practice as innovative approaches, ideas, designs and solutions are encouraged. Candidates will frame the problem, challenge, or phenomenon in the relevant literature and will design a specific change idea to be tested. Students will bring evidence from both literature and the specific setting that frames the problem, challenge, or phenomenon in the particular organizational context.
Candidate knowledge of research on district improvement; formal processes of system-wide, iterative, evidence-informed improvement; research-based strategic planning processes that engage diverse stakeholders; and data collection, diagnosis, and use.
NELP 1.2
Candidate knows the need for a district improvement plan. Candidate knows the research of required models for district improvement.
Candidate knows the components of a district improvement plan. Candidate knows the research on improvement models and its use in strategic planning. Candidate knows the sequential steps involved in strategic planning processes for development, implementation and evaluation of data collection, diagnosis, design, and results analysis and interpretation. Candidate knows research-based processes for engaging diverse stakeholders in the strategic planning, implementation and evaluation for continuous improvement.
Candidate understands the components of a district improvement plan. Candidate understands the research on improvement models and its use in strategic planning. Candidates understands the sequential steps involved in strategic planning processes for development, implementation and evaluation of data collection, diagnosis, design, and results analysis and interpretation. Candidate understands research-based processes for engaging diverse stakeholders in the strategic planning, implementation and evaluation for continuous improvement.
Candidate understands and through self disclosure is comfortable with carrying out the components of a district improvement plan through collaboration in its development. Candidate understands the research on improvement models and its use in strategic planning through multi-layered collaboration. Candidates understands and facilitates others in understanding the sequential steps involved in strategic planning processes for development, implementation and evaluation of data collection, diagnosis, design, and results analysis and interpretation. Candidate understands and facilitates others in understanding research-based processes for engaging diverse stakeholders in the strategic planning, implementation and evaluation for continuous improvement.
Educational Leadership Skills
Candidate demonstrates skills required to evaluate existing improvement processes.
NELP 1.2
Candidate applies various tools and techniques (e.g. fish-bone diagram and other graphic organizers and analysis tools) for evaluating existing improvement process.
Candidate applies various tools and techniques (e.g. fish-bone diagram and other graphic organizers and analysis tools) for evaluating existing improvement process with the district office leadership team.
Candidate applies various tools and techniques (e.g. fish-bone diagram and other graphic organizers and analysis tools) for evaluating existing improvement process with the district and school leadership and board membership.
Candidate applies various tools and techniques (e.g. fish-bone diagram and other graphic organizers and analysis tools) for evaluating existing improvement process with the district and school leadership and board membership and the community stakeholders.
Problem of Practice (POP)
Candidate identifies and develops a Problem of Practice into a manageable focus
WilmU 1
Searching as Strategic Exploration: Candidate constructs and implements effectively designed search strategies using appropriate methods or information retrieval systems
WilmU 4
Information Creation as a Process: Candidate identifies and describes potential formats/creation processes that would be appropriate to their action research topic, recognizing the difference between formal publication and information exchange.
WilmU 4
Resource Evaluation: Candidate evaluates information and its sources critically for its value, relevance and accuracy.
WilmU 4
Candidate selects a topic that is too broad or narrow. Defines the scope of the research question or hypothesis too broadly or narrowly. Candidate demonstrates how to formulate questions for research based on information gaps or on reexamination of existing, possibly conflicting, information. Develops a research question that is generally focused and relevant.
Candidate identified only a few, broad key terms, uses minimal or same-type sources, and may not go beyond web searching. Candidate lacks sophistication in selecting discipline-specific search engines.
Candidate marginally demonstrates how to formulate questions for research based on information gaps. Develops a research question that is somewhat focused and appropriate for the assignment.
Candidate demonstrates how to formulate questions for research based on information gaps or on reexamination of existing, possibly conflicting, information. Develops a research question that is generally focused and relevant.
Candidate develops and clearly articulates a quality research question/hypothesis that is appropriately focused and relevant to the assignment. Begins to develop additional questions and lines of inquiry.
Candidate identifies information sources that minimally meet the assignment requirements or reflect little relevance.
Candidate is unable to distinguish between scholarly sources
Candidates selects general indexes/search engines. Candidate uses simple search strategies, basic search concepts, and a list of useful keywords/search terms.
Candidate demonstrates use of basic search concepts through development of simple search strategy and a list of useful keywords/subject search terms. Candidate selects appropriate indexes/search engines and articulates the way that Library databases work (e.g. fields, records, indexing).
Candidate demonstrates the ability to use appropriate indexes/search engines and uses a mix of basic and advanced searching techniques, including discipline-specific subject headings, to access library collections and other relevant resources. Candidate demonstrates a use of alternate search avenues as new knowledge is developed.
Candidate identifies information sources that are somewhat relevant or partially meet the action research need. Candidate minimally articulates difference between scholarly sources.
Candidate identifies a variety of scholarly information sources that are generally appropriate and relevant for the assignment or action research need. Candidate articulates the value of information each format would bring to their research.
Candidate identifies and selects a variety of scholarly information sources that best answer the action research need. Candidate clearly articulates the value of information each format would bring to their research.
Candidate uses sources that may be questionable as to credibility and reliability. Has trouble recognizing authority in various media types
Candidate uses sources that are generally credible, reliable, and lacking bias. Shows awareness of how to identify authoritative content.
Candidate applies evaluation criteria when selecting sources, and recognizes bias. Sources are relevant and significant to support the research need. Begins to recognize the discipline’s standard authorities.
Candidate applies evaluation criteria (timeliness, authority, relevance, accuracy, purpose) when selecting sources. Recognizes context and bias when present. Recognizes that authoritative content may be published or unpublished. Articulates distinctions when appropriate.
Scholarship as Conversation: Candidate will be able to take part in scholarly communication and conversation.
WilmU 1
Candidate acknowledges that there are different points of view on a topic but does not articulate that there is a sustained discourse within a community of scholars.
Information has Value:
Candidate acknowledges sources and uses information following the conventions of the social sciences.
WilmU 2
Information legal and ethical work: Candidate demonstrates application of university policies regarding plagiarism, academic integrity and use of campus networks and information resources.
WilmU 5
Digital literacy Candidate effectively demonstrates the ability to use relevant technologies to manage and communicate information.
WilmU 4
Candidate fails to attribute ideas and words to others. Candidate may show improper use of sources or lack or quotation marks.
Candidate incorporates different points of view and recognizes that a scholarly work may not represent the only perspective on the issue.
Candidate uses discipline appropriate citation style of APA, but has errors. Errors in citation and references, with some ambiguity about original thought.
Candidate demonstrates need for training of university networks and information systems. Candidate demonstrates ability to use university networks and information with assistance.
Candidate incorporates different points of view and articulates that there is a sustained discourse within a community of scholars. Candidate articulates that a given scholarly work may not represent the only perspective on the issue.
Candidate uses discipline appropriate citation style of APA with repeated error type. Shows proper attribution of ideas. Candidate clearly identifies the work of other scholars whether quoted or paraphrased.
Candidate demonstrates ability to use university networks and information. Demonstrates disciplinary conventions regarding ethical use of information.
Candidate has difficulty attempting to use digital tools to organize information, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others.
Candidate is able to use digital tools to organize information, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others.
Candidate effectively uses digital tools to organize information, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others.
4 POINTS
Candidate demonstrates the value of incorporating different points of view and articulates that there is a sustained discourse within a community of scholars. Candidate recognizes that a given scholarly work may not represent the only - or even the majority - perspective on the issue.
Candidate uses discipline appropriate citation style of APA with no errors. Demonstrates consistent and appropriate use of paraphrasing and quotation of sources. Shows academic thought in quotes from another author unless paraphrased and cited.
Consistently complies with restrictions on the legal and ethical use of information and university information resources. Applies ethical use of information and presents academic integrity.
Candidate is highly accomplished in the use of digital tools to organize information, construct new knowledge, create media expressions and communications, Candidate assists others with digital tools for communication.