1 / 15

2007 Strengthening Student Success Conference, San Jose

2007 Strengthening Student Success Conference, San Jose. Dr. Jack Friedlander Executive Vice President, Educational Programs Santa Barbara City College Gabrielle Siemion SBCC instructor, On Course faculty development facilitator, SLO consultant Mark Ferrer

eavan
Download Presentation

2007 Strengthening Student Success Conference, San Jose

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2007 Strengthening Student Success Conference, San Jose Dr. Jack FriedlanderExecutive Vice President, Educational ProgramsSanta Barbara City College Gabrielle Siemion SBCC instructor, On Course faculty development facilitator, SLO consultant Mark Ferrer Associate Professor/Director, Faculty Resource Center, Faculty Professional Development,SLO Coordinator

  2. Overview of Presentation 1. Description of the process for implementing the SLO cycle at SBCC • Major challenges in implementing the SLO Assessment Cycle • Using course embedded assessment to measure student attainment of course SLOs 4. Review of mapping and reporting Forms 5. Challenges in using SLOs to improve student learning and strategies to address them K Grades vs SLOs. K Collecting student performance information to guide selection & implementation of strategies to improve student learning. K Separating SLO performance data from faculty evaluations. 6. Field test of SLO Cycle 7. Faculty member’s experience in SBCC’s SLO Initiative 8. Questions

  3. Status of Meeting Accreditation Standards and Requirements • Self-study in 2008-09 • Site visit in Fall 2009 • On target if SLO Cycle timeline is implemented • Streamlined procedures • Valuable • Number of faculty/staff that have completed SLO training: • Departments: 44 • Full-time: 145 • Adjunct: 60 • Administrators/staff: 7 • Total: 212

  4. Major Challenges in Implementing the SLO Cycle • 1. Faculty and Staff Time • 2. Funding • 3. IR Staffing & Resources • 4. Changes in Core Institutional Processes • Faculty evaluation • Program review • College planning & budgeting • Curriculum • AS committee structures • Disconnect between accreditation requirements and state policies and funding.

  5. Challenges contd. Challenges in using SLOs to improve student learning and strategies to address them K Grades vs SLOs. K Collecting student performance information to guide selection & implementation of strategies to improve student learning. K Separating SLO performance data from faculty evaluations.

  6. SBCC’s Philosophy on the use of SLOs The solepurpose of using and assessing SLOs is to improve student attainment of desired competencies. Student performance on the measures to assess their attainment of SLOs will NOT be used to evaluate any individual faculty or staff member, department, or program.

  7. SLO Cycle: Completion Sequence Departments select the courses (25% or more) for which they will complete the SLO Cycle during each of the 4 time frames.

  8. Course Embedded Assessment Course Embedded Assessment:Collecting assessment data information within the classroom provides the opportunity to use already in-place assignments and coursework for assessment purposes. In addition to providing a basis for grading students, these materials allow faculty to evaluate their approaches to instruction and course design. This assessment process: • is streamlined • Course SLOs map to program and institutional SLOs • Collect the data once • Obviates the need for new committees • Simplifies data collection and reporting systems • stays in the hands of faculty.

  9. SLO Plan WebForm

  10. DRAFT

  11. DRAFT

  12. Draft of Institutional SLOs (ISLOs) • Critical Thinking, Problem Solving and Creative Thinking (II) Communication • Quantitative Analysis and Scientific Reasoning • Social, Cultural and Aesthetic Perspectives (V) Information, Technology and Media Literacy (VI) Personal, Academic and Career Development

  13. Example: Map to Competencies I. Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, & Creative Thinking • Students will demonstrate the ability to collect information in response to a question or problem; analyze and draw valid conclusions from statements, images, data, and other forms of evidence; and assess the implications and consequences of conclusions. • Competencies: • Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Competencies • 1a.1 Identify the issue, problem, or question. • 1a.2 Ask questions that challenge assumptions and conventions. • 1a.3 Collect information and/or data. • 1a.4 Analyze information (differentiate between facts and opinions and recognize his/her own biases as well as those of others’) • 1a.5 Synthesize information, generating one or more solutions while predicting their consequences • 1a.6 Plan a timely course of action • 1a.7 Use evidence and reasoning to support and communicate a position • 1a.8 Use reflection as a way to monitor and assess a position. • Creative Thinking Competencies • 1b.1 Make connections between new and/or unrelated ideas. • 1b.2 Combine information in new ways. • 1b.3 See new possibilities. • 1b.4 Use imagination to solve problems and communicate ideas and experiences

  14. Role of IR with SLOs • Key role is to provide support • Data collection • Data analysis • Measurement • Results interpretation • Repository • Preparation for accreditation

More Related