Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project Stephen Branz Associate Dean, Undergraduate Studies and Director of General Education San José State University San Jose, CA [email protected]

408-924-2443

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project

NOT the Same Thing as Course Based or GE Area Based Assessment

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project  Structure of GE at SJSU (CSU)  Core (Lower Division) – 13 courses   Basic Skills (Oral Comm, Written Comm IA, Critical Thinking, Mathematical Concepts) Knowledge     Science – Physical, Life (and lab) Arts & Letters – Arts, Letters, Written Comm IB Social Sciences – Human Behavior, Comparative Systems, Social Issues Human Understanding & Development

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project  Structure of GE at SJSU (CSU)  SJSU Studies (Upper Division) – 4 courses (must be taken in residence; SLOs support Integrated Knowledge)  Earth and Environment (~Science)    Self, Society & Equality in the U.S. (~Soc Sci) Culture, Civilization & Global Understanding (~Humanites & Arts) Written Communication II

EO-1065 (replaces EO-1033): Mandates LEAP Program Outcomes   Each CSU campus shall define its GE student learning outcomes, to fit within the framework of the four “Essential Learning Outcomes” drawn from the Liberal Education and American Promise (LEAP) campaign, an initiative of the AAC&U.

(Sect 3.2) Each campus shall provide for regular periodic reviews of general education program policies and practices in a manner comparable to those of major programs, including evaluation by an external reviewer. The review should include an assessment of general education student learning outcomes (as designed by campuses in consonance with but not constrained by the objectives stated in Article 3.2 of this executive order). (Sect 6.2.5)

EO-1065 (replaces EO-1033): Mandates LEAP Program Outcomes    AAC&U LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes AAC&U LEAP VALUE Rubrics Example: Integrative Learning

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project  Assessment of GE at SJSU (since 1998)    Initial Certification of a GE course is based in part on an Assessment Plan Continuing Certification is based on assessment reports (previously every 4 years; since 2009 aligned with 5-yr program review – why?

) Board of General Studies (Academic Senate committee) oversees the entire process

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project  Assessment of GE at SJSU (since 1998)    Initial Certification of a GE course is based in part on an Assessment Plan Continuing Certification is based on assessment reports (previously every 4 years; since 2009 aligned with 5-yr program review – why?

campus rebellion ) Board of General Studies (Academic Senate committee) oversees the entire process

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project  Assessment of GE at SJSU (since 1998)     SLOs established & assessed for all 17 GE Areas at course level (direct assessment) 9 GE Program Objectives assessment only) (indirect – mapping of Area SLOs to Program Level Objectives (PLOs) Why should GE PLOs be directly assessed?

Your Turn!

Program Level GE Assessment:

Why is it needed?

 Why should PLOs be assessed directly?

  For both GE and degree programs, we want to determine what students know when they complete their degrees –

Why?

 Measure (assess) relative to program objectives   Ideally in capstone or culminating experiences Native vs. Transfer students, etc.

Accrediting agencies, governing boards, etc.

Program Level GE Assessment:

Why me/us?

 SJSU faculty grudgingly accept “assessment”….. HOWEVER…..

 Course level assessment of GE Area Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) well established, but no direct assessment of Program Learning Objectives (PLOs) – Why is this needed?

  Integrative learning is more than the sum of the parts; culminating assessment – Really? Why?

Supports WASC accreditation, EO 1033 expectations, and SJSU Mission – Who cares?

Program Level GE Assessment:

How? (NIMBY)

 How should PLOs be assessed?

  Mapping of course objectives vs. program objectives?

False starts & dead ends – useless?

    Have course instructors assess PLOs in their upper division GE courses?

Have BOGS develop and implement (and grade?) a final exam Q for upper division GE courses Develop a high stakes GE capstone (additional units? Convert one or more UD GE courses?) Refined ideas about what is NOT possible 

Program Level GE Assessment:

Strategy/Plan?

 How should PLOs be assessed?

 Common Exit Exam? (compare with SJSU WST)  What if students fail?

     Common Assessment Tools? (aka “signature assignments”) Common Assessment Rubrics?

Sampling?

Group Reading? If so, how to calibrate?

What to do with results???

Program Level GE Assessment:

What Worked!

 How should PLOs be assessed?

   Carrots, not sticks!

GE Program Assessment (GEPA) – Spring & Fall 2010 Design and Results

Program Level GE Assessment: GEPA Design  3 Faculty Teams (for one calendar year)  Aligned with UD GE Areas (R, S, V at SJSU)    Within each team, choose faculty from different colleges Reward = 0.2 assigned time, Spring 2010 Tasks – choose 1 local (R, S, or V) SLO and 3 LEAP/VALUE rubrics      Identify assignments aligned with SLOs Create and/or modify rubrics for assessment Anonymous reading/assessment of random selection of papers from each other’s courses Calibration for inter-rater reliability Report results in standard format

Program Level GE Assessment: GEPA Results (Area S)  Participating Faculty     Scot Guenter – AMS 169: The American Dream Wendy Ng – SOCI 162: Race and Ethnic Relations Matt Masucci – KIN 101: Sport in America Anne Marie Todd – COMM 168W: Global Climate Change II (9 unit, two semester course sequence) = “Team SJSU”)

Program Level GE Assessment: GEPA Results (Area S)  SLOs Chosen     Area S #1 – students shall be able to describe how identities (i.e. religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, disability, and/or age) are shaped by cultural and societal influences within contexts of equality and inequality LEAP/VALUE – Inquiry & Analysis LEAP/VALUE – Critical Thinking LEAP/VALUE – Integrative Learning

Program Level GE Assessment: GEPA Results (Area S)     Findings – Area S (Self, Society, & Equality in the U.S.)    “…Having conversations between faculty across programs, talking about what their courses are doing and learning about each others’ classes could be helpful. These conversations are useful to cut across the disciplinary silos and provide faculty understanding of cross-campus learning. Having the conversation by specific objectives and rubrics across disciplines will contribute to program-level GE assessment…” Need to design assignments better aligned with SLOs For Team SJSU courses (R, S, V (& Z) combined) – need to create integrative learning SLOs for syllabi Findings – Area V (Culture, Civilization, & Global Understanding)  Unlike Area S, great dissatisfaction with VALUE Rubrics, esp with columns Better to consolidate the rows, not the columns of VALUE rubrics Prior to expansion, better defining of tasks at the outset

Program Level GE Assessment: A Pilot Project   Discussion Q&A