MA+PIBS

=MA Professional and Interpersonal Behavior Scale (PIBS)=

The first MA PIBS for each graduate student will be filled out by the MthEd 590 instructor. For each subsequent student evaluation, the thesis or project advisor will fill out the MA PIBS.
 * || **Category** || **Exceeds Expectation** || **Meets Expectation** || **Unacceptable** ||
 * 1 || Personal Integrity || Candidate distinguished themselves as being honest in all activities and dealings with university students, faculty and staff, peers, and research participants, giving their all in ensuring that there was never even the appearance of lack of integrity (e.g., receiving any credit for someone else's work, misrepresenting something someone else said or did). || Candidate was honest and forth­right in all dealings with university students, faculty and staff, peers, and research participants. There was no evidence of lying, cheating, plagiarizing, or any other type of deception. || Candidate clearly and deliberately chose to engage in deceptive or dishonest activities in any context. ||
 * 2 || Kindness and Respect || Candidate always treated others, including university students, faculty and staff, peers, and research participants, with kindness, courtesy and respect (showing appropriate courtesy and deference, seeking and implementing feedback, trying to understand and being respectful of others opinions and perspectives, being aware of and responding appropriately to others' needs). || Candidate typically treated others, including university students, faculty and staff, peers, and study personnel, with kindness, courtesy and respect. || Candidate often showed a lack of respect and/or kindness to university faculty and staff, peers, research participants, or others. ||
 * 3 || Learning Community || Candidate was clearly attentive throughout all classes, eager to participate and understand concepts and anxious to make a positive contribution and ensure that their classmates understood the concepts as well. Candidate facilitated interaction in group activities, showed acceptance and support for all class­mates and instructor (regardless of racial/ethnic, religious, or cultural differences), and made a concerted effort to “get along,” avoiding or resolving conflicts. || Candidate contributed posi­tively in class by demonstrat­ing an openness for learning, paying attention, supporting the teacher and classmates (regardless of any differences such as racial/ethnic, reli­gious, or cultural), contributing positively to the learning of classmates in whole or group activities, avoiding conflicts, and refraining from disruptive activities (e.g., talking on phone, eating, reading newspaper, carrying on a conversation). || Candidate was inattentive and disruptive in class (e.g., talking on the phone, reading the newspaper, carrying on private conversations), and difficult for classmates, students, and/or the teacher to work with in small group or whole group activities. May show tendencies of prejudice toward classmates or teachers from different racial, cultural, or religious backgrounds, or social status. ||
 * 4 || Responsibility || Candidate not only turned in assignments on time, but completed the work with exceptional thoroughness and clear understanding of the materials. In class, candidate came fully pre­pared, having read assignments and done all other activities assigned or suggested outside of class. Such prep­aration also allowed the candidate to make excep­tion­al contributions in class and to be prepared for, able to take the lead in, and make a significant con­trib­ution to group activities or student learning. || Candidate turned in assignments on time, and addressed all details and requirements adequately. In class, they had read assigned materials, often contributed meaningfully to class discussions or student learning, and carried a full share of the work in all cooperative activities. || Candidate did not complete all assignments, and those that were completed were often poorly done with little attention to detail and the requirements for satisfactory completion. The candidate did little work or reading outside class and was unable to contribute meaningfully to class discussions, cooperative group activities, or student learning. ||
 * 5 || Attendance and Punctuality || Candidate had perfect attendance at all classes and other program activities. Candidate arrived to class and other program activities in plenty of time to be prepared for the start and ready to participate, and remained involved and participating the entire time. || Candidate regularly attended class and other program activities. Candidate was on time to class and other program activities or obligations and stayed through the entire class period or activity. || Candidate regularly missed classes and infrequently participated in other program activities. Candidate often arrived late to class and other program activities and/or left early. ||
 * 6 || Flexibility || Candidate quickly accepted changes and was able to easily adjust and compensate as these changes affected teaching and mentoring assignments, coursework, and interactions with committee members, university staff, and peers. Showed ingenuity and creativity when faced with problems or obstacles in fulfilling assignments. || Candidate accepted and adjusted to changes that affected teaching and mentoring assignments, coursework, and interactions with committee members, university staff, and peers. Fulfilled assignments and completed work despite problems or obstacles that arose. || Candidate often was unable or refused to adapt to changes or situations that affected teaching and mentoring assignments, coursework, and interactions with committee members, university staff, and peers. Assignments were not completed or responsibilities were not fulfilled when confronted with obstacles or problems. ||
 * 7 || Initiative || Candidate consistently perceived needs, requirements or opportunities in their coursework, teaching, or research, and took appropriate action. They constantly sought ways to improve their surroundings, and showed ingenuity and creativity in solving problems and completing tasks. || Candidate typically perceived needs, requirements or opportunities in their coursework, teaching, or research, and took appropriate action. They often sought ways to improve their surroundings, and showed ingenuity and creativity in solving problems and completing tasks. || Candidate often failed to perceive needs, requirements or opportunities in their coursework, teaching, or research, and thus did not take appropriate action. They seldom sought ways to improve their surroundings, and failed to show ingenuity and creativity in solving problems and completing tasks. ||
 * 8 || Productive Independence || Candidate consistently exhibited ownership of their research and learning (e.g., regularly assessed the progress in their learning or research, set and achieved goals, took responsibility for identifying and addressing problems, treated faculty as resources rather than supervisors), and managed time well (e.g., established and met deadlines, devoted an appropriate amount of time to each task, scheduled time so that the work was appropriately spread out over a period of time). || Candidate typically exhibited ownership of their research and learning, and managed time well. || Candidate frequently relegated responsibility for their research and learning to others. Candidate frequently failed to devote the appropriate amount of time to required tasks, and often rushed to meet deadlines or asked for an extension of deadlines. ||
 * 9 || Dress and Grooming || Candidate exceeded the expectations of the Honor Code and showed their commitment to professionalism by dressing in modest clothing that clearly set them apart from the students they taught. || Candidate’s dress was consistent with the University Honor Code, and sufficiently modest and professional to set candidate apart from the students they taught. || Candidate violated the Honor Code in dress and grooming and/or dressed in ways that were clearly unprofessional and inappropriate for a teacher. ||
 * 10 || Thesis/Project Progress || Since the previous evaluation, candidate exceeded expectations in making progress toward completing their thesis/projectand/or in the quality of their work (in terms of the elements of quality research outlined in Learning Outcome 2). They actively sought advice and feedback from their advisor, met regularly with them, and were well prepared for each meeting. || Since the previous evaluation, candidate met expectations in making progress toward completing their thesis/project and in the quality of their work (in terms of the elements of quality research outlined in Learning Outcome 2). They regularly met with their advisor and were prepared for meetings. || Since the previous evaluation, candidate has not met expectations in making progress toward completing their thesis/project or in the quality of their work (in terms of the elements of quality research outlined in Learning Outcome 2). They failed to regularly meet with their advisor or were unprepared for meetings. ||