1 / 49

The Board’s Role in Overseeing Educational Quality

The Board’s Role in Overseeing Educational Quality. Peter Eckel, AGB Vicki Golich, Metropolitan State University Denver Jeremy Haefner , Rochester Institute of Technology. Overseeing Educational Quality. The Role of the Board. The Board? (Isn’t ed quality a faculty responsibility?).

zita
Download Presentation

The Board’s Role in Overseeing Educational Quality

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. The Board’s Role in Overseeing Educational Quality Peter Eckel, AGB Vicki Golich, Metropolitan State University Denver Jeremy Haefner, Rochester Institute of Technology

  2. Overseeing Educational Quality The Role of the Board

  3. The Board? (Isn’t ed quality a faculty responsibility?) Fiduciary responsibility (parallel to financial audit) Responsibility ensure that decision makers have best tools and data available Ultimate responsibility for soundness and integrity of the institution’s programs

  4. Ensure that the institution has an appropriate set of learning outcomes statements Ensure that efforts to determine the effectiveness of teaching and learning are in place and ongoing Ensure that institutions use the data they collect for improvement The Curriculum is the Faculty’s Responsibility… The Board’s Role is to Remind Them of That Responsibility Peter Ewell. Making the Grade. AGB

  5. Boards and Student Learning Increasingly concerned; but continually perplexed

  6. What Boards Hear: The Public Story

  7. What Boards See: How Students (and Families) Feel

  8. Discussion: Your Board and Student Learning Outcomes Does it spend too much; too little; or just enough time on student learning outcomes? What is the relative balance of time discussing learning vs money matters? Does the board spend more time on student learning now vs. 5 years ago?

  9. Most Boards Don’t Do Enough

  10. AGB-Teagle Project: Drake University (IA) Metropolitan State University of Denver Morgan State University (MD) Salem State University (MA) St. Olaf College (MN) Rhodes College (TN) Rochester Institute of Technology (NY) Valparaiso University (IN)

  11. A quiz: Does your board…… • Know the institution’s learning outcomes goals? • (Know that you have goals???) • Have a dashboard learning outcomes (direct/indirect outcomes) ? • Discuss ed quality with faculty? • See and discuss academic program reviews? • Set aside time for educational quality?

  12. Don’t Be Surprised:Common Board Difficulties Fish (accountants?) out of water Impatience/Lack of time: Academic issues take time Unfamiliar language of academic assessment (I thought NSSE was a sea monster…. And NIOLA was a town in Hawaii…..) Evidence of academic quality is often ambiguous and hard to interpret and use

  13. Two Approaches Rochester Institute of Technology Metropolitan State University of Denver

  14. Academic quality and the Board of Trustees from the RIT point of view April 2014

  15. AGENDA

  16. Context

  17. The context for the conversation • 2008 – Provost hired with mandate to engage the board • Historically BOT very engaged with financial fiduciary role • 2009 – Great recession begins to manifest • Concern for academic quality in tough financial time

  18. Partnership with Education committee • Charlie Brown, Chair, Education Core Committee • Devised a ‘trilogy’ of conversations on academic quality with the Education Core Committee • 2011: April, November, July

  19. Objectives

  20. Process

  21. Important tool for discussion • Contents organized around indicators • Academic quality • Student-learning outcomes • Retention and graduation • Stakeholder input • Program review • Accreditation

  22. Some questions you will see • Do we say what and how much students should learn? • What kinds of evidence do we collect about student learning? • Are we benchmarking performance against external standards? • What progress have we made in addressing recommendations from the last Middle States review? • Who is responsible for assessment and how it is accomplished? • How do we use assessment results? • How does our performance measure up? • What do student responses tell us about the quality of their academic experiences? • Are we considering other stakeholder views?

  23. Academic Quality Dashboard

  24. InputIndicators Student Indicators Top 10% Mean HS GPA Mean ACT Composite Mean SAT (CR+M+W) Legend: CR = Critical Reading, M = Math, W = Writing Faculty Indicators

  25. Environmental Indicators Student Indicators

  26. Environmental Indicators, cont’d Student Indicators NSSE Summary Questions

  27. Environmental Indicators, cont’d Faculty Indicators *Includes undergraduate + graduate sections *Data source: IPEDS *2012-13 Preliminary (does not include NTID). Final available in Nov 2013

  28. OutputIndicators Placement Noteworthy: in 2011-12 HIGH response rate of 85.6%

  29. OutputIndicators, cont’d Employer Satisfaction Learning Outcomes * 5 point Likert scale, 5 = Excellent and 1 = Poor

  30. Q05. How well did the highest education from RIT prepare you for each of the following? Excellent preparation Poor preparation Fair preparation Good preparation *PCUAD = Private College and University Alumni Directors Alumni Relations leaders from 40 mid-size to larger-size private colleges and universities (50k-225k alumni) get together twice a year to share the benchmarking data and compare resources and results.

  31. Q07. How important was each of the following to your experience as a student, and how well did RIT do at providing them? RIT 2011

  32. ECC By-Laws, 2nd Reading

  33. Section 1

  34. Section 2

  35. ECC Plan of Work: 2013-2014

  36. ECC Plan of Work: 2013-2014

  37. Introducing the Board toEducational Quality Oversight: I • Years of providing information from External Program or Accreditation Review of Academic Programs (most on a 7-year cycle) • Results of most recent year + • 1-year follow up to answer the question: What have we done to address uncovered weaknesses • No real understanding of what such reviews entailed • Provided extensive information about how these reviews are conducted and the role of faculty/staff in each

  38. Introducing the Board toEducational Quality Oversight: II Provided extensive detail regarding annual peer review processes related to assessment of student learning outcomes Introduced Board to some of the 21st teaching and learning/course redesign efforts in place Reported on status of online/hybrid/in-class course delivery In-progress efforts to identify University-level graduate learning outcomes

  39. Introducing the Board toEducational Quality Oversight: III • Fall Board Retreat • Prepared Report – Executive “Summary” (19 pages long) + 22 pages of detailed appendices • Addressed Peter Ewell’s observations in Making the Grade (2006) • How MSU Denver • Is embedding High Impact Practices • Adds value to students (modified open enrollment institution) • Devoted half-day to discuss

  40. Trustee Jeopardy

  41. 10 Point Questions & Answers • Students • What percentage of MSU Denver students are transfers? • 60% • Graduation Pass Rates • True or False: 50% of MSU Denver transfer students graduate within 7 years? • False: MSU Denver transfer students graduate within 9 years.

  42. 10 Point Questions & Answers • Faculty • How many tenured faculty does MSU Denver employ? 310 281 223? • 281; MSU Denver also has 179 tenure track (probationary) faculty members • Our Programs • What does “SAI” stand for? • Supplemental Academic Instruction

  43. 10 Point Questions & Answers • Metrics • What % of Latino/Hispanic Enrollment does MSU Denver need to achieve in order to achieve HIS designation? • 25% Full Time Equivalent Students (FTES)

  44. What Now? Deep focus on retention and how to determine which things we do matter as we seek to enroll, retain, and graduate students Academic and Student Affairs Leadership Team (also includes ITS) in constant conversation about what we are doing Improving metrics

  45. http://agb.org/improving-board-oversight-student-learning Board Oversight of Student Learning

  46. Lessons for Progress Ensure sufficient institutional assessment capability Start with what you already have Make academic quality a priority of the board and institutional leaders Attach the effort to other activities Peter Eckel, “Lessons Learned about Student Learning: 8 Test Cases,” Trusteeship, Jan-Feb 2014

  47. Lessons for Progress Educate the board on education Find the right focus Allow for targeted deeper dives Develop new board processes and use time differently Deepen the board’s engagement with faculty Peter Eckel, “Lessons Learned about Student Learning: 8 Test Cases,” Trusteeship, Jan-Feb 2014

  48. Thank you Peter Eckel (Peter@agb.org) Vicki Golich (vgolich@msudenver.edu) Jeremy Haefner(jahpro@rit.edu)

More Related