Transcript AIR Workshop Strategies for the Practice of Institutional

Reflecting Back to Move
Forward:
Quality Enhancement Planning
Karen Webber Bauer
Presented to
Academic Affairs Faculty Symposium
Unicoi State Park, Helen GA
March 30, 2007
[email protected]
Today’s UGA
Fall 2006
• 33,959 students
• SAT = 1228
• From 131 countries, many US states
• 4,000 courses per term
• 900,000 student credit hours per year
• High retention and graduation rates
• 8,546 degrees awarded 05-06
•
•
Total revenues of $1.24 billion (FY06)
18 million square feet of space
What do we know about our students?
•
•
•
•
Academically
Psychosocially
Alcohol use
Grades, majors
What we don’t know (or know enough)
• Why students depart prior to graduation
• How and when do student most effectively learn
•
Lecture vs. small groups, classroom, distance, etc.
• How study abroad, internships affects the thinking,
actions of our students
• Who and why go to work and grad school
• Perceptions of alumni
• How Gen Ed intermeshes with goals & objectives
in the major
Yes, some efforts ongoing
• And that’s great!
Assessment – Why?
Improvement
Accountability
Institution-wide
assessment like a puzzle
LCs; Capstone
NSSE
Writing Rubric
Program Eval
No one
measure
adequate
Five Levels of Assessment
Level 1:
I ndividual
Level w/in course
Level 2: Individual
learning level across
courses
Emphasize self-reflection
Level 3: Course level
Portfolios, embedded, common
assignments, capstone,
Level 4: Program level
Embedded, portfolios, common across multi-sections,
capstones
Level 5: Institutional level
Summarized info at institution-wide level
From Miller, R. & Leskes, A. (2005). Levels of Assessment: From the Student to the Institution. Washington, D.C.: Association of
American Colleges and Universities.
Assessment Methods for Levels 1 & 2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Objective exams
Reflective essays
Portfolios
Case studies
Small group assignments
Research paper/lab report
Oral exams
Performances
Examples of Rubrics
•
http://wsuctproject.wsu.edu/ctr.htm
•
http://eng.auburn.edu/programs/chen/programs/accreditation/
assessment-rubrics.html
•
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/rubrics.shtml
•
http://faculty.academyart.edu/resources/rubrics.asp
•
http://www.winona.edu/AIR/rubrics.htm
•
http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php
Ways to assess learning
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
One minute paper
Muddiest point
Point-counterpoint
Mind maps
Journal entries
Peer lessons
Card sort
See Silberman, M. (1996). Active Learning: 101 Strategies. Boston, Allyn & Bacon.
• Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique
http://www.epsteineducation.com/ifat.php
Do Grades Have a Place in Assessment?
• Sure, but can’t be the only evidence
• Tell us how well a student performed but don’t
tell us if s/he mastered components such as
critical thinking, writing skills over full
program
• Don’t tell us what students learn in
cocurricular activites
So– we need goals & objectives and
measurable outcomes !
Ask yourself:
• Is the outcome measurable?
• Is it meaningful?
• Is it manageable?
• How will I know when it’s been achieved; how do I
develop systematic assessment?
Adapted from Bresciani, M. (2004). Outcomes-Based Academic & Cocurricular Program Review.
Make It Measurable
(see handout)
• Design an experiment to test a chemical hypothesis
• Write with clarity, coherence, correctness
• Use voice, movement to interpret a dramatic character
NOT Easily Measurable:
• Think critically
• Be a lifelong learner
• Be a good citizen
Why Assess?
• Improvement
• Individual faculty and departmental curriculum
• Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)
• Accountability
• Reaffirmation of Accreditation
The QEP
• Carefully designed and focused set of activities that
address one or more aspects of student learning.
• Complements the ongoing institution-wide
evaluation already occurring
• Evolves from a series of discussions, reflection of
what we know, where we are going
• Plan must be submitted 4-6 weeks prior to site visit
The QEP
• May include addressing changes in students’
knowledge, skills, behaviors, and/or values
• Examples:
•
•
•
•
•
•
enhancing the academic climate for learning
increasing student engagement in learning
strengthening general education curriculum
enhancing critical thinking skills
enhancing innovative teaching strategies
introducing innovations in use of technology in curriculum
Goals for Today & Tomorrow
• Regarding Teaching and Learning-- use the
break out sessions and other discussion time
to explore:
•
•
•
•
•
Summary of current activity
Opportunities for advancement
Measures to assess success
What resources needed
Impact on faculty
Select References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Angelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Online teaching goals inventory . Center for Teaching, University
of Iowa. http://www.uiowa.edu/~centeach/tgi/
Angelo, T. & Cross, P. (2000). Classroom assessment techniques. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bloom’s Taxonomy: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm
Bresciani, M. (2006). Outcomes-based academic and co-curricular program review. Sterling, VA:
Stylus.
Critical Thinking Community: http://www.criticalthinking.org/
Collaborative Learning – info from UD’s Center for Teaching Effectiveness:
http://cte.udel.edu/ccl.htm
Grunert, J. (1997). The course syllabus. A learning-centered approach. Bolton, MA: Anker
Publishing.
Huba, M & Freed J. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses : shifting the focus
from teaching to learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Suskie, L. (2004). Assessing student learning. Boston: Anker Publishing.
Walvoord, B. (1998). Effective grading : a tool for learning and assessment. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.