|
Session Title: Use of Context in Developing and Implementing a 10-year-old Collegiate Leadership Studies Program
|
|
Panel Session 727 to be held in Suwannee 17 on Saturday, Nov 14, 9:15 AM to 10:45 AM
|
|
Sponsored by the Assessment in Higher Education TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Valerie K York, Kansas State University, vyork@ksu.edu
|
| Abstract:
Leadership Studies and Programs (LSP) at Kansas State University includes undergraduate academic coursework, a value-centered learning community, and an array of programs that include civic leadership and service-learning activities. In 2007, a decade after LSP's founding, its leadership decided that program evaluation should be undertaken. The Office of Educational Innovation and Evaluation took an evaluation approach that was multidimensional and utilized a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods. The methodology involved two major components: 1) Program history and characteristics, including review of archival data, interviews and content analysis, stakeholder surveys, and comparison and validity studies; and 2) Impact studies, including a short-term impact study of current LSP students, and a long-term impact study of a decade of program graduates. This evaluation of LSP provided a dynamic retrospective study of the first 10 years of the program and essential data for staff to use for ongoing program improvement and strategic planning.
|
|
Discovering the History and Context of a Leadership Studies Program Through Evaluation
|
| Sarah A Bradford, Kansas State University, sbradfor@ksu.edu
|
| Linda P Thurston, Kansas State University, lpt@ksu.edu
|
| Lindsay L Edwards, Kansas State University, llr2@ksu.edu
|
|
Evaluators developed a historical organizational case study as part of the evaluation of Leadership Studies and Programs (LSP) at K-State. The historical case study of LSP included a document analysis and an oral history. The oral history was used to determine the perceptions of the founders about the creation of LSP, the constraints and challenges of the program, and the founders' expected outcomes and evaluation needs. The document analysis of 10 years of program materials allowed the evaluators to define critical events and put them into a historical context within the University and within the field of student leadership development. Combined into a historical organizational case study, the evaluators were able to tell the "story of LSP," thus providing a basic understanding of the program, the context and history of the program, and substantive aspects of the program for stakeholders.
|
|
|
Examining the Voices of Stakeholders to Inform the Evaluation
|
| Valerie K York, Kansas State University, vyork@ksu.edu
|
| Linda P Thurston, Kansas State University, lpt@ksu.edu
|
| B Jan Middendorf, Kansas State University, jmiddend@ksu.edu
|
| Jennifer E McGee, Kansas State University, jemcgee@ksu.edu
|
| Sarah A Bradford, Kansas State University, sbradfor@ksu.edu
|
|
The Office of Educational Innovation and Evaluation identified expected outcomes of the Leadership Studies minor held by various program stakeholders, including faculty/staff, founders, the Advancement Council, students, and alumni. The evaluation team designed and implemented impact evaluations that: 1) assessed students' attitudes, competencies, and dispositions at various stages in their progress through the minor, and 2) examined the program's contributions to students' success in and beyond their university experiences. Expected outcomes collected from faculty, founders, the Advancement Council, and the LSP Community Student Learning Outcomes were the basis for instruments used to collect data from students and alumni. Surveys, interviews, and focus groups were used to identify the perceptions of and expected or experienced program impact on students in the four courses required for the Leadership Studies minor and on program alumni.
| |
|
Utilizing Accepted Standards to Evaluate an Academic Leadership Development Program at Kansas State University
|
| Linda P Thurston, Kansas State University, lpt@ksu.edu
|
| Valerie K York, Kansas State University, vyork@ksu.edu
|
| B Jan Middendorf, Kansas State University, jmiddend@ksu.edu
|
|
Evaluators from the Office of Educational Innovation and Evaluation sought and utilized appropriate standards to use as part of the evaluation of Leadership Studies and Programs (LSP) at Kansas State University. The evaluation question was: How does K-State's program measure up using College Student Leadership Development Program and W.K. Kellogg Foundation criteria? The standards were utilized to consolidate data across all 15 studies in the evaluation and to determine the extent to which the K-State program "measures up" to these national criteria. The LSP program met over half of the 73 criteria for student leadership development programs established by Chambers (1992). Of the 32 Kellogg Foundation Hallmarks (Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhart, 1999) 66.8% were affirmed. The standards allowed the evaluators to identify some outstanding qualities of the program. The evaluators made recommendations to the program related to the 31 un-met standards.
| |
|
Improving and Sustaining Leadership Studies Through Evaluation Utilization
|
| Susan M Scott, Kansas State University, smscott@ksu.edu
|
| Mary Hale Tolar, Kansas State University, mtolar@ksu.edu
|
| Linda P Thurston, Kansas State University, lpt@ksu.edu
|
|
Leadership Studies and Programs at K-State had existed within the College of Education for ten years when it commissioned the Office of Educational Innovation and Evaluation to conduct a program evaluation. The program was on the cusp of becoming a School of Leadership Studies, and evaluation was needed for strategic planning, documenting successes, and fundraising. One of the five purposes of the evaluation was to "provide accurate and valid data to stakeholders for various purposes, such as strategic planning." The evaluation results have been utilized in several ways. For example, the faculty have implemented strategies to examine important aspects of their curriculum and make substantial improvements. Information about perceptions of expected student outcomes has allowed the program to address the type and content of information they provide about the program. The impact evaluation and the historical case study have been essential in sustaining the program in times of budget constraints.
| |