1 / 32

Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE) Http://www.gsu.edu/que

Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE) Http://www.gsu.edu/que. Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University Byron Brown Valdosta State University Jackie Thornberry Georgia Perimeter College Dee Abrahamse California State University Long Beach. QUE Framing Questions.

zulema
Download Presentation

Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE) Http://www.gsu.edu/que

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. Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE) Http://www.gsu.edu/que Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University Byron Brown Valdosta State University Jackie ThornberryGeorgia Perimeter College Dee AbrahamseCalifornia State University Long Beach

  2. QUE Framing Questions What happens if we offer resources and support for reform of the curriculum to arts and sciences faculty at public universities and two-year colleges—and ask them to work together? What if we ask them to describe what students ought to know and be able to do in their disciplines and then use that information to set standards for practice? Support provided by Pew Charitable Trusts and ExxonMobil Foundation

  3. About QUE • Faculty-driven • Two-year/four-year partnerships - clusters • Draft, voluntary student learning outcomesand standards in a discipline • Standards at level 14 [associate degree] for major and non-major • Standards at level 16 [baccalaureate] for major

  4. How does QUE define standards? [NPEC] ‘Learning outcome’ - the knowledge (facts, concepts, principles) and skills (processes, strategies, methods) to be learned ‘Standard’ - a predetermined criterion of a level of student performance ‘Assessment’ - the process of collecting data/evidence about student learning outcomes

  5. INSTRUCTIONAL PARADIGM Time held constant, learning varies Covering material Degree equals accumulated credit hours LEARNING PARADIGM Learning held constant, time varies Specified learning results Degree equals demonstrated knowledge and skills Challenge of changing systems

  6. Series of individual courses Coverage of material Develop learning outcomes Set standards Integrate experiences Define how to assess Develop pedagogy and develop supports Instructional Learning paradigm paradigm

  7. Grades and seat-time vs. learning outcomes • Limitations of grading and sorting system • Assessment as a program organizing principle • Need to approach assessment as register of student progress through the program, not just in a particular course • Curricular or program mapping

  8. Conceptual Framework of QUE • Stage 1: Development of each learning outcome associated with a major: What should students know, understand, and be able to do? • Learning outcomes for level 14 • Learning outcomes for level 16 • Disciplinary contributions to General Education learning outcomes or cross cutting literacies.

  9. Level 16 H B I I S O QUE T L O O ---------------- R G ------------- Level ---------------- Y Y ------------- 14 Foundation ------------- to major ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- Introductory English Math Sciences History core Essential Learning Level Social English Math Sciences 12 Sciences

  10. Conceptual Framework of QUE • Stage 2: Development of evidence that a student has attained desirable proficiencies in a course: • Aligning assignment with learning outcome • Developing scoring guides or rubrics • Constructing performance standards for a learning outcome • Scoring student work

  11. Conceptual Framework of QUE • Stage 3: Development of evidence that a student has attained desirable proficiencies in a program: • Analyzing program to determine learning outcomes for sequences of courses, usinggap analysis or Super-matrix. • Using the super-matrix, trace assessment of learning outcome through the program • Developing aligned assessments so that a student can demonstrate growth through courses towards proficiency in the total program • How do we capture student developmental progress as s/he proceeds randomly through a series of courses that make up a program?

  12. Super-matrix or gap analysis • For the matrix of courses within program, comparing program outcomes: • Does the course add significantly to the learning of the program outcome? • Does the course add significantly to the assessment of the program outcome?

  13. Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Course 4 Course 5 Total Outcome 1 1 4 4 0 4 13 Outcome 2 2 1 2 0 2 7 Outcome 3 1 2 0 2 0 5 Super-matrix or gap analysis

  14. Quality in Undergraduate (Humanities) Education Designing Standards in the Humanities Using Standards to . . . Reconfigure Curriculum Transform Classrooms Empower Students

  15. Phase 1: DefiningStandards for Change Stăn ́dərd (a): “A flag, banner, or ensign . . . bearing heraldic devices distinctive of a person or corporation.” Stăn ́dərd (b): “An acknowledged measure of comparison for quantitative or qualitative value; a criterion.”

  16. Phase 2: Using Standards to Reconfigure Our Curriculum • Writing on the Palimpsest of History • Setting Expectations for Student Progress Gateway Courses • ENGL 2060 (Introduction to English Studies) • ENGL 3060 (Literary Research and Writing) Capstone Course • ENGL 4900 (Senior Seminar)

  17. Phase 3: Implementing Standards-Based Instruction • Challenging, Purposeful Assignments • Explicit, Transparent Performance Standards • Clear, (Student-Designed?) Scoring Rubrics

  18. Phase 4: Internalizing Standards within Students • Student-developed Portfolios (to demonstrate proficiency in each standard) • Reflective Introductions to Portfolio Selections (to give students ownership of the assessment process) • A Senior Thesis (to address weaknesses, reinforce essential skills, and produce a writing sample for graduate school admission)

  19. Two-year/Four-year interaction and student transfer • Difference in culture • Importance of administrator involvement • Sustained attention to relationships • Common faculty concern for success of transfer students

  20. Discussion Topics - mathematics • Course alignment for transferability • Tests, projects, handouts, portfolios • Textbook selection • End of course assessment

  21. Outcomes • Mathematical Modeling • College Algebra/Precalculus • Calculus Sequence

  22. Embedding Assessments in History • Performance standards in history: focus on historical thinking and skills at survey, transfer and major levels • Shared standards, rubrics, student work, assessments in rich conversations about historical thinking and learning • “Transparency” as a theme

  23. Level 14 standards in American and World History (Salisbury) Broad standards, types of assignments tied to each standard (example: interpreting primary and secondary documents)

  24. Gateway Courses: Historical Methodology (CSULB) • Assessable competencies published to all students • Assignments agreed on among sections • Enforced as prerequisite to further courses in major • Work forms basis of portfolio

  25. Portfolio Assignments (Begun in Gateway) - CSULB • Self-reflective essays: gateway and capstone • Examples of work: (2-4 pieces each category) • Historiography, theory papers • Analytical work (primary source analysis, websites, etc)

  26. Portfolio (continued) • Mechanical skills (research proposal, computer literacy) • Presentation: oral presentation tape, Power Point, teaching unit Portfolio advisor meets with students throughout major Capstone seminar: Research paper and presentation, portfolio review and assessment

  27. Work in Progress • Theory and Historiography course (gateway pt 2) • Aligning assignments in other courses (portfolio demonstrates shortages in rest of curriculum)

  28. Lessons Learned • Focus on sharing ideas about learning in the discipline, with others in the field • Quality of learning improves – brings other faculty in • It’s intensive, and committed faculty need support to do it • Institution needs to be clear about its value in reward system

  29. Connecting Public Audiences to our work • Expectations made explicit • Better coherence of degree • Student/parent better understanding of progress through course and towards degree • A baccalaureate degree represents both a broad liberal education and specialized learning

  30. Accomplishments of QUE Intentionality of curriculum Importance of systematic alignment among learning outcomes, assignments, assessments, and program Value of expanded community of judgment Set standards that provide common referent point for evaluating student work beyond limits of grades

  31. Quality in Undergraduate Education QUE Http://www.gsu.edu/que Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University Byron Brown Valdosta State University Jackie ThornberryGeorgia Perimeter College Dee AbrahamseCalifornia State University Long Beach

More Related