Signature Project + Major Assignment (A+ Required)

Page 1 of 8

Signature Project

Overview

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION SIGNATURE PROJECT CONTEXT STATEMENT

The Signature Project is designed to guide candidates through the steps for planning and conducting an in- depth school improvement project focused on improving teaching and learning. The project involves an opportunity for candidates to apply the knowledge, skills, and behaviors they gain from their respective programs. The Signature Project is structured and implemented in a way to improve identified needs within a school community. Candidates will document the mastery of a substantial number of program standards with the planning, implementation, and evaluation of their projects.

Candidates in all advanced programs will receive proper instruction, support, and feedback to guide them through the completion of the two stages of the Signature Project. Candidates must work collaboratively with course instructors, P12 practitioners, and other school stakeholders on the Signature Project to develop the skills required to successfully complete both stages of the Signature Project and to ensure the products for each stage meet minimum requirements to

represent proficiency at the appropriate level on the evaluation continuum. Candidates will prepare Signature Project Stage 1 in ED 504. The Signature Project Stage 1 is a research proposal. In subsequent courses (depending on program), candidates will complete a final presentation which includes an 8-10 minute video explaining the project, including details about the identified problem, background investigation, action plan, and impact on teaching and learning. Ultimately, candidates will be expected to earn a minimum of 80% of the possible points for each stage in the Signature Project before they are eligible to receive an advanced degree.

The Signature Project concept was developed by a committee of unit faculty and P12 partners in Summer 2016. Further development of the project stages’ descriptions and evaluation rubrics was put on hold while the unit worked to complete a successful NCATE re-visit in Fall 2016. Project development resumed in Fall 2017. The entire unit faculty had an opportunity to provide

feedback with respect to stage drafts created by the committee, in Fall 2017 and Spring 2018. Adjustments to the original products and the development of an assessment platform in Blackboard followed in Summer 2018 and Fall 2018. Adjustments were made based on the recommendations of a committee of university faculty and P-12 partners. Pilot administration of the Signature Project stages will begin in Spring 2019, but completed projects will not begin to be evaluated outside of courses until candidates advance through the project stages. Focus group interviews with candidates and faculty involved in the pilot will begin after implementation. Afterward, revisions to the project descriptions, rubrics, and evaluation process will be completed. The unit anticipates implementing the Signature Project with all advanced programs by Fall 2020, with full candidate accountability becoming compulsory at that time.

THE SIGNATURE PROJECT

The Signature Project is designed to guide candidates through the steps for planning and

conducting an in-depth school improvement project focused on improving teaching and learning. The Signature Project has two stages. Stage 1 is addressed in ED 504. In Stage 1, candidates will design an experimental or quasi-experimental research proposal. This stage includes the

Page 2 of 8

following three major assignments: Research Problem, Literature Review, and Methodology. The three major assignments will become the three chapters for a research proposal. This research proposal is the culminating product in ED 504 and is called the Signature Project Stage 1. Signature Project Stage 2 is embedded in follow-up courses.

STAGE 1: RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Major Assignment 1: Research Problem

Candidates gather existing data from their classroom, school, district or work setting. Construct

a graphical representation that allows for easy analysis of the compiled data. Analyze the data to identify a problem or weakness that can be addressed in an experimental or quasi- experimental study. In a short narrative essay, identify the problem/weakness, connect the problem or weakness to trends or patterns represented in the data, and explain how the problem or weakness might have impacted student achievement. The required scope of the problem/weakness depends on the level of advanced degree being sought.

 Master level – classroom level or school level problem

 Specialist level – multiple classrooms or school level problem

Major Assignment 2: Literature Review

Candidates discuss the background of the identified problem, conduct a literature review following APA format (most recently published edition), and become familiar with the scholarly debate surrounding the topic or problem identified in the existing data. The scope and expectations for the literature review depend on the level of advanced degree being sought.

 Master level – describe a best practice or a trend/theory and justify its use and connection with the identified problem, use minimum of 10 sources (largely

representative of the most recent five years), describe/justify the best practice and/or theory based on each of your sources, synthesis of the literature rather than a summary is required.

 Specialist level – describe a best practice or a trend/theory and justify its use and connection with the identified problem; include a minimum of three best practice options AND a theory/trend; clear descriptions and justifications; use a minimum of 15 sources (largely representative of the most recent five years).

Major Assignment 3: Methodology

Candidates construct a measurable and executable action plan that includes a description of collaborative resources, description of the plan, and the scope and expectations. The

collaborative resources include evidence of collaboration with appropriate stakeholders (who, what role do they play, what impact do they have on the plan). The description of the plan includes a descriptive timeline, participants, variables, definitions of key terms in the study, data, resources, leverage plan, pertinent documents, and justification. The scope and expectations for the action plan depend on the level of advanced degree being sought.

 Master’s level – represents a plan to address a problem identified across multiple classrooms (i.e. teacher leader looking at data from multiple classrooms on the same grade level).

Page 3 of 8

 Specialist level – represents a plan to address a problem identified across an entire school, multiple schools, or throughout a district (i.e. an instructional leader addressing a problem across elementary schools in a district).

STAGE 2: PRESENTATION OF ACTION PLAN ANALYSIS

Candidates will construct an 8-10 minute video presentation that includes the following elements:

 Present original data and identified problem

 Summarize background investigation

 Outline the action plan

o Sampling method and sample description o Instrumentation o Collaborative efforts o Procedures o Internal and external validity

 Describe ethical considerations that must occur if you were to implement the action plan o Confidentiality o Special populations

o IRB o Other

 Present Results o Connect data and action plan outcome to student achievement o To see student achievement growth, what change in the data would you need to

see

 Reflection

o Explain the changes that you would make in your original plan o What additional research could be done in this area to improve student

achievement

Rubrics for each stage provided below.

Page 4 of 8

Stage 1: Major Assignment 1 Rubric

Writing Components

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable

Rev ision s Requ ired

T arget

A re th e foc u s an d pu rpose c lear? Missing thesis; c o nfusion abo ut o r misunderstanding o f to pic; no sense o f purpo se

Simplistic and unfo c used ideas; limited sense o f purpo se

Dev elo ped thesis; represents so und understanding o f the assigned to pic; fo c used

I s th e writin g structured an d well organ ized?

No paragraph structure; o r single, rambling paragraph; o r series o f iso lated paragraphs

Organ ization struc ture is presen t, but is c o nfusing o r disjo inted; weak paragraph struc ture; transitions are missing o r inappro priate

Clear organ ization al stru cture; easily followed; in c ludes transitions; stru ctured form at

I s c orrec t sen tence structure an d proper m ec hanics u tilized?

Co ntains multiple and serio us errors o f sentenc e structure: i.e. fragments, run- o ns; unable to write simple sentences; numero us erro rs in spelling and c apitalizatio n; intrusive

and/o r inac curate punctuation;

c o mmunicatio n is hindered

Form u laic sentence pattern s or ov eruse of sim ple sen tences; erro rs in sentence structure; c o ntains several punctuatio n, spelling, and/or c apitalizatio n errors (u p to 6); errors m ay or m ay n ot in terfere with m ean ing

Effec tive an d v aried sen tenc es; errors (if present) due to lac k o f c areful proofreading; v irtu ally free of pu n ctuation, spelling, c apitalization errors (n o m ore than 3); errors do n ot in terfere with meaning

A re v oc abulary an d word u sage v aried an d appropriate?

V o c abulary is unso phisticated; o r subjec t specific v ocabulary o r so phistic ated v ocabulary used inc o rrectly

Pro per, bu t simple vocabu lary u sed;

subjec t specific v ocabulary used infrequently

V oc abulary is v aried, spec ific an d appropriate; u ses su bjec t spec ific v oc abulary c orrectly

I s A PA form at followed? There are signific ant fo rmat errors present ; multiple (m ore th an 6) o f A PA fo rmatting errors; in the reference list

and/o r in-text c itatio ns

Fewer th an 6 A PA form at errors are present in the referenc e list in-text; c itations; header; headings; page numbers; etc .

There are v irtually n o A PA fo rmat errors present in either reference list in-text; c itations; header; headings; page numbers; etc .

Con tent Components

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable

Rev ision s Requ ired

T arget

Sou rc e of data is c redible an d data is represen tative of th e sc ope requ irements for th e adv anced degree bein g sou ght

(InTASC 6, 9; CAEP A1.1)

The so urc e o f the data is ambiguo us o r lac ks c redibility; data do es no t allow fo r pro blem/weakness identification appro priate fo r required pro ject sc ope

T h e sou rc e of th e data is c lear an d c redible; data do es no t allo w fo r pro blem/weakness identification appro priate fo r required pro ject sc ope

The so urc e o f the data is c lear and c redible; data allows for iden tific ation of an of a c lassroom, m ulti-classroom, sc h ool or distric t level problem/weakness appropriate to th e required project

sc ope

Graph ic al represen tation of c om piled data allows for easy an aly sis

(CAEP A1.1)

Graphic al fo rmat do es no t present the data in a c lear manner; data is o nly partially presented

Graph ic al format(s) is appropriate an d c learly presen ts all th e c ollected data

Graphic al fo rmat(s) is appropriate; c learly presents all the c o llected data; h ighlights v isible patterns or tren ds

I den tified problem/weakness is su pported by trends or patterns seen in th e data

(InTASC 6, 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Pro blem/weakness is no t c learly identified o r do es no t align with the trends and patterns identified in the data

Problem /weakness is c learly iden tified; align s with th e type of data c ollected, but c o nnections between the trends/patterns in the data are no t c learly

desc ribed in the narrative

Pro blem/weakness is c learly identified; aligns with the ty pe o f data c o llected; c lear c on n ections between th e trends/patterns are drawn in th e

Narrativ e

Page 5 of 8

Stage 1: Major Assignment 2 Rubric

Writin g Com ponents

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable Rev ision s Requ ired T arget

A re th e foc u s an d pu rpose c lear? Missing thesis; c o nfusion abo ut o r misunderstanding o f to pic; no sense o f purpo se

Simplistic and unfo c used ideas; limited sense o f purpo se

Dev elo ped thesis; represents so und understanding o f the assigned to pic; fo c used

I s th e writin g structured an d well organ ized?

No paragraph structure; o r single, rambling paragraph; o r series o f iso lated paragraphs

Organ ization struc ture is presen t, but is c o nfusing o r disjo inted; weak paragraph struc ture; transitions are missing o r

inappro priate

Clear organ ization al stru cture; easily followed; in c ludes transitions; stru ctured form at

I s c orrec t sen tence structure

an d proper m ec h an ics u tilized?

Co ntains multiple and serio us errors o f

sentenc e structure: i.e. fragments, run-ons; unable to write simple sentences; numerous erro rs in spelling and c apitalization; intrusive

and/o r inac curate punctuation;

c o mmunicatio n is hindered

Form u laic sentence pattern s or ov eruse of

sim ple sen tences; erro rs in sentence structure; c o ntains several punctuatio n, spelling, and/or c apitalizatio n errors (u p to 6); errors m ay or m ay n ot in terfere with m ean ing

Effec tive an d v aried sen tenc es; errors (if

present) due to lac k o f c areful proofreading; v irtu ally free of pu n ctuation, spelling, c apitalization errors (n o m ore than 3); errors do n ot in terfere with meaning

A re v oc abulary an d word u sage v aried an d appropriate?

V o c abulary is unso phisticated; o r subject spec ific v ocabulary o r so phisticated v o c abulary used inc orrectly

Pro per, bu t simple vocabu lary u sed;

subjec t specific v ocabulary used infrequently

V oc abulary is v aried, spec ific an d appropriate; u ses su bject specific v oc abulary c orrectly

I s th e sou rc e requiremen t m et an d

is A PA form at followed?

So urc e requirements fo r the appropriate level

were no t met; there are signific ant fo rmat erro rs present ; multiple (m ore th an 6) o f A PA fo rmatting errors; in the reference list and/o r in-text c itatio ns

Meets m in imum requirements for degree

lev el: Masters – A m in imum of 10 sou rc es were u tilized; Fewer than 6 A PA form at errors are present in the reference list in-text; c itatio ns; header; headings; page numbers; etc .

Fiv e (5 ) sou rc es beyond m inimum requires

were u tilized; there are v irtually n o A PA fo rmat erro rs present in either reference list in-text; c itatio ns; header; headings; page numbers; etc .

Con tent Components

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable Rev ision s Requ ired T arget

Best prac tic es are iden tified an d su pported by th e literature as v iable respon ses to weaknesses an d problem s represented by the data

(InTASC 8, 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Best prac tice(s) are no t c learly identified; literature reviewed do es no t support the identified best prac tice(s) as a v iable o ptio n to improve ac hievement

Best prac tic e(s) are c learly iden tified; literature rev iewed do es no t support the identified best prac tice(s) as a v iable o ption to improve ac hievement

Best prac tice(s) are c learly identified; literature rev iewed su pports the iden tified best prac tic es as v iable responses to th e problem /weakness iden tified

T h eories an d/or tren ds are iden tified an d c onnected with best prac tic es in literature

(I n T ASC 8, 9, 10; CA EP A 1.1)

Theo ry o r trend is no t identified; theo ry/trend identified are no t c o nnected with the best prac tice(s) via literature

Theo ry o r trend is c learly identified; literature rev iewed do es no t c onnect the identified theory/trend with the identified best prac tice

Theo ry o r trend is c learly identified; literature rev iewed c onnects the identified theory/trend with all identified best practices

Proper lev el of sy n thesis is ac h ieved in th e literature review (InTASC 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Summaries were giv en; are no t c lear o r fail to make c lear c o nnections with best practice(s) and/o r theory/trend(s) identified as v iable respo nses to problem/weakness

Su m m aries are c lear an d c on cise; c lear c on n ections with best prac tice an d/or th eory/trend iden tified as v iable response to problem /weakness m ay or m ay n ot be presen t

Sy n th esis rather th an su mmaries of c on tent presen ted in th e c ollection of sou rc es is presen t , c lear c onnections with best practice and/or theo ry/trend identified as v iable response to

pro blem/weakness present

Page 6 of 8

Stage 1: Major Assignment 3 Rubric

Writing Components

CATEGORY Unacceptable Rev isions Required Target

Is correct sentence st ructure and proper mechanics utilized?

Con ta ins multiple a nd ser ious errors of sen tence str u cture: i.e. fragments, run-on s; u nable to write sim ple sen tences; numerous errors in spelling a n d capitalization; intrusive a nd/or inaccurate pu n ctuation; communication is h indered

Formulaic sentence patterns or ov eruse of simple sent ences; errors in sen tence structure; contains sev eral pu n ctuation, spelling, a nd/or capitalization errors (up t o 6); errors may or may not interfere with meaning.

Effect ive and v aried sentences; errors (if pr esent) du e to la ck of careful proofreading; v irtually free of punctuation, spelling, capitalization errors (no more t han 3); errors do not interfere with meaning.

Collaborative resources are identified, ex plained and supported (InTAS C 1, 5, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Colla borative resources are ambiguous or n ot iden tified; r esources may be identified, but no ex planation related to their v alue or r ole is pr ov ided; the connection between the colla borative r esource a nd the identified pr oblem is n ot clear

Collaborative resource(s) is identified; ex planation of v alue and role is provided, but the con n ection between the collaborativ e r esource(s) a nd the iden tified problem is n ot clear

Colla borative resource(s) is identified; ex planation of v alue and r ole is prov ided; connection bet ween t he collaborative resource(s) and t he identified problem is clear

Description of plan is clear and easy t o follow (InTAS C 7, 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

A ction plan is n ot described; description is n ot clea r; steps in plan a re not in a log ical or der

Act ion plan description is provided, but additional deta il may be warranted; st eps in plan are outlined, bu t a dditional steps may be n eeded or the or der could be a ltered for better efficiency

A ction plan description is pr ov ided, and sufficient det ail is included; steps in plan a re ou tlined; ex haustive list of st eps and sequence of st eps allows for opt imal efficiency and outcome.

Project t imeline accounts for all elements in t he plan and allocates appropriate amounts of t ime for each element (InTAS C 7, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Pr oject timeline is missing or incomplete; time a llocation is inadequate or too ex tensive for on e or m or e elements included in the plan

Project t imeline is provided; all elements identified in the plan are included, but additional elem ents m ight be needed for a n improv ed ou tcome; tim ing a nd/or time a llocation could be improv ed

Pr oject timeline is pr ov ided; all necessary elements are included for opt imal outcome

Variables are identified and defined (CAEP A1.1)

V a riables a re misidentified Variables are identified correctly, but with no clear defin itions or ex planations a s to how they w ill be m ea sured

V a riables a re identified correctly, with clear definitions and ex planations as t o how t hey will be measured

Required data needs are identified and plans for ret rieving and protecting that data are clear (i.e. methods) (InTAS C 6, 9; CAEP A1.1)

Da ta needs a re n ot identified or do n ot a lign with th e pr oblem; da ta retriev al plans a re missing or in a ppropriate

Dat a needs are identified; data retrieval plans are included, but plans for protecting the data a nd/or stu dent confidentiality are not prov ided or a re inadequate

Da ta needs a re identified; da ta retriev al plans a re in cluded; adequate plans for protecting student confidentiality and/or data are provided

Description of t he sample and sampling t echniques are provided

(CAEP A1.1)

Deta iled descriptions of th e participants a re n ot g iv en and/or sampling technique is n ot prov ided

Brief ov erview of t he sample is given and sampling t echnique may or may not be included

Full descriptions of th e pa rticipant sample, sampling t echnique and justifications for both t he sample chosen and the sampling t echnique are given

Needed resources are identified, justified, and a lev erage plan for acquiring resources is clear and supported (InTAS C 5, 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

Resou r ces are not identified or a re inadequate; no ju stification for the resources is prov ided; u nclear h ow identified r esources might be a cquired; plan for a cquiring resources is in adequate or ill con ceiv ed

Resources are identified, but a dditional resources m ay be n eeded; justification for t he resources is prov ided, but lev erage plan for a cquiring resources is n ot clear

Ex haustive list of resources is identified; ju stification for the resources is prov ided; leverage plan for acquiring resources is outlined

Just ification for how t he action plan will address t he identified problem is clear

(InTAS C 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

No con n ection between the a ction plan a nd the iden tified problem is prov ided

Connection between t he action plan and t he identified problem is provided

Con n ection between the a ction plan a nd the identified pr oblem is prov ided; justification of t hat connection is included

Connection between action plan and impact on st udent achievement is clear (InTAS C 9, 10; CAEP A1.1)

No con n ection between action plan ou tcome a nd stu dent a chiev ement is pr ov ided

Connection between action plan outcome and st udent achievement is provided; justification of t hat connection may or may not be included

Con n ection between a ction plan ou tcome a nd student a ch iev ement is pr ov ided; justification of th at connection is in cluded; limitations or out side interferences to improved st udent achievement are identified

Page 7 of 8

Stage 2: Presentation Rubric

Writin g Com ponents

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable

Rev ision s Requ ired

T arget

I s th e graph ic al representation of th e data c lear an d appropriate?

No graphic al representation is pro vided Graph ic (s) is prov ided, but data is no t c learly and/o r c o mpletely represented in the graphic (s)

Graphic (s) is pro v ided, an d all c ollected data in represen ted in a c lear an d v isu ally appealing m an n er

A re ideas c lear an d well su pported? A bsenc e o f suppo rt fo r main po ints Su pport is prov ided, but is no t specific ; support is o nly lo o sely relevant to the main po ints

Suppo rt is pro v ided an d is sou n d, v alid, an d logic al

I s th e writin g structured an d well organ ized?

No paragraph structure; o r single, rambling paragraph; o r series o f iso lated paragraphs

Organ ization struc ture is presen t, but is c o nfusing o r disjo inted; weak paragraph struc ture; transitions are missing o r inappro priate

Clear organ ization al stru cture; easily followed; in c ludes transitions; stru ctured form at

Did th e writer c on sider au dience an d ton e?

No awareness o f appropriate audience fo r assignment; to ne is inappropriate

A waren ess of appropriate au dience for th e assign m en t, but tone is inc o nsistent

A wareness o f appro priate audience fo r the assignment; ton e is c onsistent an d effec tive

I s c orrec t sen tence structure u tilized?

Co ntains multiple and serio us errors o f sentence struc ture: i.e. fragments, run-o ns; unable to write simple sentenc es

Fo rmulaic sentence patterns o r overuse o f simple sentenc es; errors in sentence structure

Effec tiv e and v aried sentences; errors (if present) due to lac k o f c areful pro ofreading

A re proper m ec hanics u tilized?

Frequent errors in spelling and c apitalization; intrusiv e and/or inaccurate punc tuation; c o mmunicatio n is hindered

Co ntains sev eral punctuation, spelling, and/or c apitalizatio n errors (up to 6); erro rs interfere with meaning

V irtually free o f punctuation, spelling, c apitalization erro rs (no mo re than 3); erro rs do no t interfere with meaning

Con tent Components

CA T EGORY Un ac c eptable

Rev ision s Requ ired

T arget

V ideo len gth appropriate an d adh ered to th e ou tlined requ irements

V ideo length do es no t adhere to the o utlined requirements

A dh erence to ou tlined video len gth requ irements, but video may be to o brief to adequately c over the required c omponents o r to o lengthy to ho ld the audience attentio n

A dherence to o utlined video length requirements; v ideo adequ ately c overs the required c om pon ents an d en gages th e audience from start to fin ish

Pre-projec t data is presen ted an d c on n ects to th e identified problem

Pre-pro ject data is no t presented; c o nnection with the identified pro blem is no t ex plained

Origin al data is presen ted, but c onnection with the identified pro blem is no t ex plained

Original data is presented; c onnec tion with th e iden tified problem is ex plain ed

Bac kgrou nd in formation is su m marized an d c onn ected to

literature

Bac kgro und info rmation is no t presented; c o nnection between bac kground and c redible

literature is no t ev ident

Bac kgrou nd in formation is presen ted, but the c o nnection between bac kground and c redible literature

is no t c learly presented

Bac kgro und info rmation is presented; c onnection between background an d literature is

in c lu ded, an d c redible sou rces are referen c ed in disc ussion

A c tion plan an d timeline are c learly ou tlined

A c tio n plan and/o r timeline is no t o utlined and/or steps in plan are missing

A c tion plan , in cluding all steps, is ou tlined , but the timeline is no t c lear

A c tio n plan, including all steps, is o utlined; tim elin e is logical an d c learly presented

Eth ic s issues are iden tified an d addressed

Ethic s issues are no t addressed Eth ic s is disc ussed; h owever, some key ethics issu es are n ot iden tified or eth ics issu es are iden tified an d m ethods to c ontrol for th em are n ot addressed

A ll key ethic s issues are identified and a c o mplete disc ussio n o f the researcher’s steps to c ontrol fo r them is giv en

Con n ection to student ac hievement is c learly presen ted

Co nnec tio n with student ac hievement is no t desc ribed

I m pact on student ac h ievement is desc ribed, but the c o nnection between the plan and what the ex pectation is to see po sitive student ac hievement is not spec ified

Impac t o n student ac hievement is desc ribed and the c on n ection between plan an d wh at the ex pec tation is to see positive student ac h ievement is c learly specified

Page 8 of 8

A n alysis of c u rrent ac tion plan is th orough

A naly sis is inc omplete; o bvious weaknesses in the plan are no t ex plained

A n alysis is disc ussed, bu t n o su ggestions for im provement in the ac tion plan are giv en

A naly sis is disc ussed tho roughly an d su ggestions for im provement in the ac tion plan are given

Nex t step rec ommendation are logic al an d c learly presented

Nex t step rec ommendations are no t presented Nex t step rec ommendation s are presen ted, but may be illo gic al o r do no t adequately address all o bv ious needs

Nex t step rec ommendations are presented; rec ommendations are logic al an d adequ ately address all obv ious n eeds as well as perc eived fu ture n eeds