Global Educators Cohort Program - Teacher Education

Click here for Site Map
Jump to Main Content


Members: Lead: John Luckner: Members: Susan Easterbrooks & Cindy Bailes


Charge: Develop objectives for the project.

Deaf Education Leadership Training Proposal
The proposed project is designed to increase the quantity and improve the quality of leadership personnel who have the knowledge and skills to improve services provided to children and youth who are deaf or hard of hearing and their families by accomplishing the following five specific objectives:
1. Provide financial support to 24 doctoral (i.e., two cohort groups of twelve individuals) trainees from the United States pursuing a doctoral degree in deaf education at one of the designated Tier 1* universities over a period of forty-eight months.
2. Enhance the preparation of the doctoral trainees through participation by members of each cohort group in enrichment activities (e.g., special meetings, apprenticeships, externships).
3. Target recruitment efforts to attract qualified individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, disabled, or from racial or ethnic minority groups.
4. Collect qualitative and quantitative data from a wide-variety of consumers (i.e., doctoral students, Tier 1 faculty, Tier 2** faculty, members of the Public Advisory Council) that will be used to conduct formative and summative evaluations to guide project improvement and to document project efficacy.
5. Disseminate information about the project to all stakeholders and interested parties.
  • Tier 1 Universities are those that:
• Have an established doctoral program with a specialization in education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing;
• Have at least one full-time tenure line or tenured faculty member in the area of education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing who can serve as a doctoral advisor.
• Have graduated at least one doctoral student in the last three years who has completed a dissertation concerning an aspect of teaching and learning with infants, toddlers, or youth who are who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Peter Paul: I suggest that we slightly revise this to the following:
*Have graduated at least one doctoral student in the last five years....etc.
OR, have current doctoral students in the program, not supported by the Leadership Grant.

It is possible that some programs will not have full-time PhD students, supported by the LG, at the initial funding period. However, such programs may already have PhD students, who would be interested and should participate in the project.


  • Tier 2 Universities are those that teacher preparation programs in the area of education of
students who are deaf or hard of hearing, but do not have a doctoral program.

Evaluation Questions

Objective 1 Evaluation Questions:
a) How many individuals applied to participate in the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
b) How many individuals received support from the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
c) How many consortium universities enrolled doctoral students supported by the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
d) How many doctoral students who were supported by the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant exited their doctoral preparation program prior to completion of their degree?
e) For individuals who exited their doctoral preparation program prior to completion of their degree, what were the primary reasons for not completing the program?
f) For individuals who completed their doctoral preparation program with support from the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant, what type of employment (e.g., higher education, school administration, curriculum specialist) did they undertake after completing their doctoral preparation program?

Objective 2 Evaluation Questions:
a) How many enrichment activities were planned and made available to project participants?
b) How many project participants took part in each enrichment activity?
c) What types of enrichment activities were planned and made available to project participants?
d) What specific enrichment activities were perceived by project participants as being the most valuable?
e) What specific enrichment activities were perceived by project participants as being the least valuable?
f) How many faculty from consortium universities participated in the enrichment activities?
g) How many faculty from Tier 2 universities participated in the enrichment activities?
h) How many individuals from the Public Advisory Council (PAC) participated in the enrichment activities?

Objective 3 Evaluation Questions:
a) How many individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, disabled, or from racial or ethnic minority groups applied to participate in the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
b) How many individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, disabled, or from racial or ethnic minority groups were selected as project participants in the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
c) What recruitment strategies were implemented to attract individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, disabled, or from racial or ethnic minority groups to participate in the Deaf Education Leadership Training Grant?
d) What recruitment strategies did project participants who are deaf, hard of hearing, disabled, or from racial or ethnic minority groups perceive as being effective?

Objective 4 Evaluation Questions:
a) Were qualitative and quantitative data collected from a wide-variety of consumers?
b) Were the data collected and analyzed used to guide project improvement and to document project efficacy?
c) Were any primary data sources more beneficial than others for conducting formative and summative evaluations?

Objective 5 Evaluation Questions:
a) Was information about the project disseminated to stakeholders and interested parties?
b) What types of dissemination activities were conducted?
c) Were specific types of dissemination activities more effective than others?