EDLD 5345 - The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly

Here is the reply from Dr. Cortez-Rucker to my email earlier today. What I wrote is in the blueish color, Dr. C's replies are in red. There are some good thoughts here, and some that will make you scratch your head. Either way, we will all get through this class with each other's help. Dr. C sent the email to three other course professors at Lamar. 

In the immortal words of the marvelous Capt. James Nesmith, in that great cinematic masterpiece "Galaxy Quest", NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER SURRENDER!

---------

Answers to an e-mail:

Progress Monitors-

If I understand your intent correctly these quizzes are designed to help us, as candidates, to be better prepared for the TExES Principal Certification test. That is great and I thank you for it. However, I am not happy that 1/3 of the grade in a class built around Human Resource Management is based on the results of a quiz built on questions from the TExES exam. Why can't the monitors be diagnostic? They are designed to help us take the test, not test our knowledge of this course's material and content. Also, why are the tests only given on Fridays, with a password, with each question requiring a selection with no chance to change and/or review? The purpose of online classes, at least for myself and many I have talked with, is the availability of flexibility.

Diagnostic exams (in the field of education) are a determinate, in regards to produce evidence that teachers need to make defensible instructional decisions.  Students’ performances on these exams let teachers know what cognitive skills or bodies of knowledge students are having trouble.  With this in mind, it is apparent after five years of program application, and state mandated examinations that there are several areas of weakness.  Thus, the alteration of the present class and a strengthening of the process.  The weakness of diagnostic testing does not tell teachers (professors) how to carry out instruction to rectify deficits in achievement and/or learning.  A legitimate diagnostic exam will (1) not be too complicated or time-consuming (thus five questions), (2) include items to assess attributes to give the professor a reasonably accurate fix on the students mastery of the attribute  (five exam questions per week over a five week term), (3) and describe with clarity what the exam is assessing.  I will be forwarding first exam results to all students later this week, after the disaggregation is complete.  BUT, present simple data clearly implies that 30% of  the students are not aware of application of information to the Domains and Competencies.

In regards to testing time and process.  In the past,  the exams were given over a three day window.  No to little security and thus the passing rates matched the overall GPA’s when the data was reviewed.  While on the open and public view it looks great!  BUT when our students must meet the challenge of the information in a state certificated exam it is not. 

Discussion Prompts-
There seems to be some vertical alignment issues with the discussion board prompts between what is on Blackboard and what appears in the Thread creation matrix. Whatever the correct question prompts are is great, I just don't want to lose points due to answering the incorrect set of questions.

There was a technical “glitch” over what is identified on the discussion prompts, in the class and what is on the threads.  That should have been corrected today.  The old discussion threads were weak and produced no definite evaluation decision sets.  So, specific areas were identified that are marked closer to the state exams.

Video Lectures-

I read what you wrote about the video lectures being outdated, and that Dr. Jenkins had much to teach us. This is totally understandable as Dr. J has many years of experience and great wisdom. I am wondering if there might be some content that we are missing out on as a result of the roll-out of the class being ahead of final revision and review. We started the EDLD program in June of 2013, and have taken 5311, 5301, 5326, 5344, & 5333 prior to 5345. Why are we changing our program in the middle of the program? I am really trying to stay positive but it is tough. The words that have been floating around my cohort's discussion lately are "guinea pigs".

There has been no program alteration.  Only the exam method was changed.  This has caused a concern for approximately 30% of the 800 plus students.  At present, the data shows a total of 413 student making B or better on the first five questions.

You are not losing content, but rather, beginning to review highly specialized content areas needed to be a successful building administrator or central office administrator; as presently described by the SBOE/TEA of Texas.  At this level, you have reached a professional peak that requires you to “specialize” in Educational Administration.  That is what a Master Degree does.  We go beyond general knowledge and seek specific growth in detail, which for us is determined by the SBOE/TEA school administrator requirements.

Adobe Connect Sessions-

The online chats are a great concern to me. This isn't new to this class, but the great number of changes that we are facing in 5345 have brought this to a greater point of concern. With over 800 students in this class why are utilizing technology that limits our weekly sessions to 100 people? This concern dovetails with my concerns about the progress monitors and discussion boards: We are required to have our discussion posts up by Thursday, and the quiz has to be taken on Friday, with the video discussion able to only service approximately 1/9 of the class and their concerns and questions. There has to be a better answer.

As of this date, and after countless reviews of student evaluations and comments, of classes over the past five years, it was determined that the old webinar conference was not meeting student needs.  Thus the change to virtual office hours at that time for students wishing to ask question and/or seek help.  The need to “meet” once a week was a tool that proved inadequate, cumbersome and obviously by the student evaluations and comments, a true loss of time.  Thus the change. 

Lamar Field Supervisors-

As I said before my cohortmates and I started this quest in June of 2013, with a degree plan in place. We all have met with our Lamar Field Supervisors and submitted artifacts to TK20, and now things have changed. On December 30, 2013, I received an email from my LFS (Dr. Perez, whom I truly love and am happy to work with) outlining upcoming LFS chat sessions. On January 17, 2014, I received an email from Dr. Perez that stated, "Lamar is putting place a new system. I wish you the best with your career. Robin". I don't understand why this system has changed in the first place, but why has it come about in such a fashion? With the dates of the emails (Dec. 30 and then Jan. 17) it seems that communication on the changing of classes/program wasn't given to the LFS folks as well as the students.

After countless number of student evaluations and comments, in regards to the field supervisors, the faculty –in hopes of meeting the TEA/SBOE and student specific requirements-has changed this process.  A complete alteration of this  process is in play and will continue until we feel satisfied that it meets the present need requirements.  Additional information will be arriving via the Educational Leadership Department in the very near future.

It is with paramount sincerity that we seek to alleviate perceived program weakness.  The Master’s Degree in Educational Leadership with Certificate is incredibly important to Lamar and ultimately to our students.  Present data clearly implies weaknesses in the 18 class program that are culminating in a weakness in state mandated certification scores.  That we will eliminate.

I hope this helps.  As always, I am available for communication via webinar, SKYPE,  e-mail and phone.

Dr. Cortez-Rucker