Doctoral Students Will Be Able To Write An Empirically-based Research Paper.
Students completing the Ph.D. program will demonstrate the necessary tools and knowledge to produce an empirically-based research manuscript eligible for submission to a peer reviewed academic journal.
Indicator
Rubric Evaluating A Selected Element Submitted As Part The Doctoral Portfolio Defense.
Doctoral students are required to submit and defend a portfolio of selected written research products that were developed during their tenure in the doctoral program to a panel of faculty members. The portfolio committee chair will select one written component that best demonstrates the student’s ability to conduct scientific research. The portfolio chair will utilize the attached rubric, which lists the key aspects of a quality scientific manuscript, to assess the selected element.
Criterion
An Average Summary Score Of 80 Or Above On The Rubric
Students will average a summary score of 80 or above on the elements included in the rubric with items weighted equally. Within the selected element, students will have integrated the various disparate components of the literature on a specific CJ topic into a cogent review of literature, presented a well-defined research question, quantitative or qualitative analysis of data, a summary of results, and contextualized those results. A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the research will be included.
Finding
9 Students Successfully Defend Portfolio
During AY 2012-2013, 10 students submitted and defended a portfolio of selected written products as a demonstration of their scientific research abilities. Of these students, 9 successfully defended their portfolio with scores higher than 80 percent indicated the pass/fail distinction. Moreover, within these nine students, 5 students were designated as having received “high passes” – a distinction of the highest quality of the doctoral portfolio process. One student failed to successfully defend their portfolio and chose to depart the Doctoral program.
Action
Measuring Research Competency
As additional Ph.D. students progress through the program, an increased number of portfolios will be examined with an eye toward determining the feasibility of this process in measuring research competency and whether an added rubric is needed.
Goal
Doctoral Teaching Fellows Provide Quality Classroom Teaching
Doctoral Teaching Fellows Provide Quality Classroom Teaching
Objective
Doctoral Teaching Fellows Provide Quality Classroom Teaching
Advanced doctoral students will develop and demonstrate their aptitude for providing high quality classroom instruction for undergraduate students.
Indicator
Doctoral Teaching Fellows IDEA Evaluation Forms And Direct Observation By Faculty
Doctoral Teaching Fellows IDEA Evaluation Forms and Direct Observation by Faculty
Criterion
Score Of 4.0+ On IDEA, 80+ On Observation
Doctoral Teaching Fellows will perform at or above the similar/middle 40% box on the IDEA evaluation form. Summary Evaluation will be 4.0 or above for teaching evaluations. The attached rubric will be used by faculty observers of a selected DTF led lecture. Students will obtain an average score of 80 or above on the overall rubric.
Finding
IDEA Evalutions
In the Fall 2012 semester, teaching evaluations for courses taught by doctoral teaching fellows ranged from 2.9 to 4.6 with a mean score of 3.6. In the Spring 2013 semester, teaching evaluations for courses taught by doctoral teaching fellows ranged from 3.1 to 4.5 with a mean score of 3.95. Only a limited number of DTFs were observed for their teaching abilities a test pilot test of the rubric. Each DTF observed ranked above 80 or higher on the faculty-developed rubric; however, a number of suggestions were made to allow improvement in their pedagogy.
Action
Additional Opportunities For DTF's
Refinements to the doctoral curriculum and evaluation activities will be made to provide students with additional opportunities to learn, develop and reflect upon their teaching pedagogy. Further, more frequent classroom observation by varying faculty will be considered as an additional feedback mechanisms for DTF’s.