Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx

Running head: ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL
CAPS 1
2
[School Name] School/Family/Community Partnership
Evaluation Report
by
Student’s Name
EDLD 5339
Date of Submission

Your evaluation report should be:
· Double-spaced between all text lines
· Times New Roman typeface
· 12-pt font
· 1-inch margins on all sides
· The general rule is to use numerals to express numbers 10 and
above and words to express numbers below 10.
· In-text citations: Follow the author-date method. This means
that the author's last name and the year of publication for the
source should appear in the text, for example, (Jones, 2014),
and a complete reference should appear in the reference list at
the end of the paper.
· Each source cited in text must appear in the reference list at
the end of the paper and “each entry in the reference list must
be cited in text” (APA, 2010, p. 174). A personal conversation
is the only exception. You will cite a personal conversation
within the text, however, you will not list it within the
references.
· Review carefully the APA guidelines to ensure all references
and citations are formatted correctly.
· Use direct quotes only if you have good reason. Most of your
paper should be in your own words. You should summarize or
paraphrase.
.
Title of Evaluation Report
Center and Bold the Title
(Lamar Requirement)
Section One
Because the introduction is clearly identified by its

position in the paper, it does not have a heading. Your paper
opens with an introduction that sets the stage for the reader to
better understand the overall school/family/community
partnership evaluation process. Your report’s first paragraph is
an introduction to your evaluation process. In this section you
explain the process by which your stakeholder committee,
which includes administration, faculty, parents (families),
community members, and business partners, work
collaboratively to evaluate school level family and community
communication and partnerships. The purpose of the report
should be stated in the first or second paragraph. The first part
is typically several paragraphs describing the overall scenario
or context of your study, e.g. name of school, location, relevant
history, campus demographics (ethnicity and socio-economic
level of students, grade levels, urban or rural, etc.), stakeholder
committee demographics as well as any other relevant
information that will assist the reader in understanding the
context of your report. Include any significant challenges or
biases discovered that might impact the project. The reader
should have a good idea what the paper is about before finishing
the first page.
Background
Level 2 Heading
In the background section provide a description of how
you have worked with your campus mentor to involve the
principal or assistant principal, counselor(s), teachers from each
grade level or department, parents (families), community
members, and business representatives in the SFC stakeholder
committee to assess schoolwide progress in strengthening
communication and partnerships between the school and the
school’s families, community and business members. Describe
the timeline and process for establishing the committee as well
as the process of guiding the committee in the completion of the
evaluation. Additionally, discuss the process the SFC
stakeholder committee used to identify areas of strengths and

needs based upon the survey results.
Review of the Literature
Level 1 Heading
Section Two
This is a new section of the paper. Use APA Level 1 heading (a
bold, centered text header). The Review of the literature
consists of an introduction, body (with subtopics/themes) and a
summary (conclusion). The subtopics/themes that are identified
should be APA Level 2 headings in this section. You should
have at least two Level 2 headings. Write your literature review
using the third person (i.e., do not use "I"). Use the past tense
to describe results (e.g.., "Ames observed that . . . ").
A literature review is a way of organizing what has been written
about a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Your
purpose is to convey to your reader what you have learned
through a careful reading of literature related to
school/family/community partnerships and the impact of this
involvement on student learning. The goal of this section is to
introduce the reader to the major issues and themes from
experts in the field. By broadening your readers’ understanding
of the major issues surrounding your research, you further
solidify the credibility and trustworthiness of your work. The
review of the literature section should contain no commentary,
personal opinion; only synthesize the findings of the experts to
give an objective review of the issues involved. Highlight areas
that have been successful in a school/family/community
partnerships. Also examine areas that pose challenges to the
development of partnerships. The goal of the literature review
is to create a coherent narrative that lays the foundation for the
understanding of the impact of school/family/community
partnership involvement on student learning. You will cite
research from articles, studies, etc., including district or state
information gathered that is pertinent to your study. There is no
limit on the number of references cited but typically, eight to

ten studies will suffice. You are expected to include a
minimum of eight current references (no more than 10 years
old) that clearly support best practices that relate to your study.
Use direct quotes only if you have good reason. Most of your
paper should be in your own words. You should summarize and
paraphrase with appropriate APA citations documenting the
source of information. The review of the literature section may
be several pages or many pages that explain what the current
research shows about your topic. Typically, this section is four
to six pages. Remember that each reference cited in the
literature review should be written in APA format and included
in the references section of your report.
Since there is a lot of information to convey in this section, in
the introduction, you should identify the general topic, thus
providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature.
Point out the overall trends in what has been published about
your topic and establish your reason for reviewing the
literature. In the body, the main themes/subtopics that are
identified as APA Level 2 headings. As you review the articles
you found on your topic, look for at least
two variables or themes that are consistently described in the
articles you read. See if you can divide the articles by theme of
the research or any other significant factor. Make these
groupings and decide what the subtopics should be based on
your subgroups. These subgroups will evolve into a separate
heading of the literature review. You should have at least 2
APA Level 2 headings. Finally, use an APA Level 2 heading
for the summary section of your literature review.
Subtopic/Theme One
Indent and objectively present the best information you have
found relevant to your first theme. Each subheading should
have at least three references.
Subtopic/Theme Two
Indent and objectively present the best information you have
found relevant to your second theme. Each subtopic should
have at least three references.

Summary
Text goes here. Summarize major contributions of significant
studies and articles to the body of knowledge under review,
maintaining the focus established in the introduction. No new
information should be presented or cited in the summary.
Findings
Section Three
This section presents the findings from your study. Notice that
this is a new section of the paper. Use APA Level 1 heading (a
bold, centered text header). In this section, you report your
data analysis process as well as the results from your data
analysis. Remember you are just reportingin this section. Save
your interpretations of the findings or results for the
“Conclusions and Recommendations” section. In the first
paragraph of the “Findings” section, it is helpful to give the
reader a brief introduction into the section’s content.
You collected quantitative data (rating scale survey) and should
present the data in a clear fashion with tables, bar graphs, etc.
In short, present the numerical data in a simple way so that the
reader can easily see the results. You may want to consider
organizing the data by the survey categories: a) Improving
Communication, b) Promoting Positive Parenting, c) Enhancing
Student Learning, d) Increasing Volunteerism, e) Supporting
Decision-making and Advocacy,
f) Collaborating with the Community.
You have also collected qualitative data from your
stakeholder meetings such as
1) minutes of meetings and discussion, 2) committee member
comments regarding identified strengths and needs based on
data analysis findings and 3) recommendations by committee
members for prioritized action steps to be taken based upon the
findings. Based on qualitative data, provide a thorough
discussion of stakeholders’ collaborative decision-making
process in the identification of the top three needs and the
partnership that was chosen to address the need identified as

highest priority. Describe the elements of the SFC partnership
and potential plans to implement the partnership. You will
present your qualitative findings in a narrative. You may
consider using bullets or sub-headings where appropriate to
help the reader better understand your results.
Summary
For the “Findings” section, it is helpful to include a short
summary paragraph. Use APA Level 2 heading to introduce the
paragraph and summarize your findings. Describe the results in
terms of what you expected to find, and whether or not your
original expectations were supported by the data. Tie the
results back to the introduction, referring back to the articles
you presented in the review of the literature.
Conclusions, Reflection and Recommendations
Section Four
This is a new section of the paper. Use APA Level 1 heading (a
bold, centered text header). The previous sections presented the
information regarding the school/family/community partnership
evaluation project. This section begins with a brief summary of
your project.
Conclusions
This final section is for you to present the conclusions that you
believe can be drawn from the results you found. This is your
judgment, as you are now an expert on your study. The
discussion should be thorough and include information about
how the results relate to the development of a
school/family/community partnership.
Your study may have shown major or minor results in the areas
you were evaluating. Regardless of whether you got the results
you hoped for, the findings of your study are a help to others.
To understand what aspects of school/family/community
partnership and communication is working well at your school,
as well as what aspects are not being implemented or working

well, is good information for educational leaders and all
school/family/community stakeholders to have. Discuss the
strengths as well as the areas of need identified from the
evaluation as well as the action steps that are planned to
develop a partnership that address the area of concern identified
through the collaborative decision-making process.
Reflection Use APA Level 2 heading. Following your
conclusions, you should reflect on your entire study and
findings and conclusions. Remember there is no such thing as a
perfect evaluation study, the very purpose is to identify what is
in place that works well and what areas are in need of
improvement. In this reflection you summarize and explain
what you gained from the school/family/community partnership
evaluation process.Reflect on how your findings will contribute
to a change in practice for you, your colleagues, your school
with the support of families and community members. Reflect
on aspects of your study that you might want to do differently
next time.
Recommendations Since you facilitated the evaluation project,
you were in the position to best advise the reader with
recommendations. Present recommendations based on your
findings. Avoid the temptation to present recommendations
based your own beliefs or biases that are not specifically
supported by your data. Recommendations fall into two
categories. The first is recommendation to those close to your
study. Ensure the actions you recommend are based upon the
data. A recommendation could be for other ways the school,
families and community can continue to work together. The
second is recommendations to other schools, families and
communities working to improve communication and student
learning. There are always ways that a study could be improved
or refined. What would you change if you were to do your
study again? In short, this section is your opportunity to teach
those reading your study what worked, what did not work, and

ways to better solve the any issues, as well as make
recommendations for future evaluation.
References
Final Section – New Page
Begin typing here. Do not press the Enter key until the entire
entry has been typed. Press Enter to begin the next entry. The
references below are provided only as examples.
Barbour, M., & Ferdig, R. E. (2012). Virtual schooling. In S.
McLeod & C. Lehmann (Eds.), What school leaders need to
know about digital technologies and social media (pp. 53-66).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Reference from a chapter in a Book
Bonvillian, W. B., & Singer, S. R. (2013). The online challenge
to higher education. Issues in Science & Technology, 29(4), 23-
30.Retrieved from http://www.issues.org
Article from periodical with no DOI, provide home page URL
for the online archive.
Harding, T. (2010). Fostering creativity for leadership and
leading change. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(2), 51-53.
doi:10.1080/10632910903455827
Article from periodical with DOI.
Mertler, C. (2014). Action research: Improving schools and
empowering educators (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Reference from a book.
Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., & Marjaryan, A. (2013). Patterns of
engagement in connectivist MOOCs. Journal of Online Learning
and Teaching, 9(2), 149-159. Retrieved from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/milligan_0613.pdf
Article from an online periodical.

Texas Education Agency. (2013). Texas academic performance
reports. Retrieved from
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/tapr/2013/index.html
· The reference section begins on a separate page.
· References are listed in alphabetical order by last name of the
first author.
· Use hanging indention.
· Double-space all entries.
· Format all hyperlinks so they appear with no underline.
· Capitalize only the first word of a title, proper nouns, and a
word after a colon or terminal punctuation.
· Italicize book titles and journal titles.
· Italicize journal volume number, but do not italicize the
journal issue number.
· A common error is to forget a comma before the “&” when
two authors or more authors are listed in a reference.
· Only list references mentioned in the paper on the reference
page.
· Use current references, no more than 10 years old.
Reference from governmental agency.

Tasks
Level 1
Does not meet minimum criteria
Level 2
Approaches minimum criteria
Level 3
Meets
criteria
Level 4
Exceeds criteria
Week 5 Assignment: School/Family/Partnership Evaluation
Report
Introduction
Candidate provides relevant information on the school campus,
student demographics and SFC committee stakeholders and
School/Family/Community partnership evaluation.
Candidate provides limited information on campus
demographics.

(2 points)
Candidate evaluates communication support for student
learning.
Candidate describes campus demographics.
(3 points)
Candidate describes process by which stakeholders evaluate
communication and support for student learning through SFC
partnership evaluation.
Candidate describes campus demographics, and stakeholder
demographics.
(5 points)
Candidate describes process by which stakeholders work
collaboratively evaluating communication and addresses support
for student learning in and out of school through SFC
partnership evaluation process.
Candidate describes campus demographics, location, relevant
history and general context of the school.
Candidate describes stakeholder demographics.
(7 points)
Background

Candidate provides a detailed discussion of the process for
initiating the School/ Family/Community
Partnership Evaluation
Candidate develops relationships with families.
(2 points)
Candidate conducts needs assessment of campus staff and
families.
Candidate develops relationships with families.
Candidate describes timeline for establishing committee.

(6 points)
Candidate conducts SFC needs assessment of campus staff,
families, community and business members.
Candidate develops relationships with families, community and
business members.
Candidate describes timeline and process for establishing
committee.
(8 points)
Candidate conducts SFC needs assessment of campus staff,
families, community and business members.
Candidate develops relationships with family, community and
business members and involves them in the decision-making
process of the school.
Candidate describes the timeline and process for establishing
committee and process for guiding committee in completion of
SFC evaluation.
(10 points)
Review of Literature
Candidate presents well-developed review of literature with a
minimum of two subtopics supported by professional literature.
Candidate presents review literature with one or no subtopics.
Candidate incorporates 3 or less literature references and some
are more than 10 years old.
Candidate does not provide APA citations and references.

(2 points)
Candidate presents a review of literature supporting one
subtopic.
Candidate incorporates 6 current literature references (no more
than 10 years old).
Candidate does not provide APA citations and references for all
of references.
(6 points)
Candidate presents a review of literature with a minimum of two
subtopics supported by professional literature.
Candidate incorporates a minimum of 8 current literature
references (no more than 10 years old).
Candidate provides appropriate APA citations and references.
(8 points)
Candidate presents a well-developed review of literature with a
minimum of two subtopics supported by professional
literature.
Candidate incorporates a minimum of 8 current literature
references (no more than 10 years old).

Candidate summarizes and paraphrases information in the
literature and provides appropriate APA citations and
references.
(10 points)
Findings
Candidate presents data in well-organized tables or graphs and
provides discussion of decision-making process in identification
of highest priority need. Candidate describes selected SFC
partnership and potential implementation plans.
Candidate does not present data in an organized manner.
Candidate addresses two of survey categories in findings.
(2 points)
Candidate presents data in labeled tables or graphs representing
4 of the survey categories.
Candidate vaguely and generally discusses an identified need
addressed by stakeholders.

(6 points)
Candidate presents data in labeled tables or graphs representing
the 6 survey categories.
Candidate discusses stakeholders’ identification of top 3 needs.
Candidate describes elements of SFC partnership.
(8 points)
Candidate presents data in well-organized and labeled tables or
graphs that represent the 6 survey categories.
Candidate provides a thorough discussion of stakeholders’
collaborative decision-making process in the identification of
top 3 needs and the SFC partnership chosen to address the
identified highest priority need.
Candidate describes elements of SFC partnership and potential
implementation plans.
(10 points)
Conclusions
Candidate discusses data results and evaluation identifying
strengths, needs and action steps to address partnership
Reflection
Candidate provides thorough reflection on findings and

conclusions, personal and professional learning.
Candidate describes how experience contributed to change in
personal practice and impact on families, community and
businesses.
Recommendations
Candidate provides recommendations and suggestions for
additional actions to support SFC partnership, how other
schools might improve communication, and suggestions for
improvement of SFC evaluation process.
Candidate vaguely discusses the SFC partnership, but does not
address the results of the evaluation.
Candidate does not reflect on findings.

Candidate provides one recommendation.
(2 points_
Candidate provides a vague discussion of results with few
details on SFC evaluation development.
Candidate reflects on findings and provides a limited discussion
of what was learned.
Candidate provides a limited reflection on the SFC evaluation
but does not address how the experience may have contributed
to candidate’s practice.

Candidate provides vague, limited recommendations for actions
that could support the SFC partnership.
(6 points)
Candidate discusses results in relation to SFC partnership
evaluation.
Candidate discusses identified strengths and areas of needs.
Candidate reflects on findings and conclusions and explains
what was learned personally through facilitating the SFC
evaluation process.
Candidate reflects on how the experience may have contributed
to a change in personal practice.

Candidate provides recommendations for actions that could
support the SFC partnership.
Candidate provides recommendations on how other schools
might work to improve communication and student learning.
(8 points)
Candidate provides a thorough discussion indicating how results
relate to the evaluation of SFC partnership.
Candidate discusses identified strengths and areas of need, and
action steps planned to address partnership.
Candidate provides a thorough reflection on findings and
conclusions and explains what was learned and gained
personally and professionally through facilitating the SFC
evaluation process.
Candidate reflects on how the experience may have contributed
to a change in personal practice and how it may impact families,

community and businesses.
Candidate provides data-based recommendations for additional
actions that could support the SFC partnership.
Candidate provides recommendations on how other schools,
families and communities might work to improve
communication and student learning.
Candidate provides suggestions for how the SFC evaluation
process could be improved or refined.
(10 points)
Mechanics/APA
4 or more errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation or APA
(0 points)
3 errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation or APA
(1 point)
2 errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation
or APA
(2 points)
0-1 errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation or APA
(3 points)

Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx

Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx

Similar to Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx (8)

More from healdkathaleen

More from healdkathaleen (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running head ABBREVIATED VERSION OF TITLE IN ALL CAPS .docx