1 / 28

General Education Outcomes: Reviewing, Revising, and Implementing Assessment

General Education Outcomes: Reviewing, Revising, and Implementing Assessment. Mark Lanting—Associate Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences. Fundamental questions:. Why do our institutions have general education outcomes?

phyre
Download Presentation

General Education Outcomes: Reviewing, Revising, and Implementing Assessment

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. General Education Outcomes: Reviewing, Revising, and Implementing Assessment Mark Lanting—Associate Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences

  2. Fundamental questions: • Why do our institutions have general education outcomes? • What processes were used to generate your institutions general education outcomes? • How does your institution assess learners’ attainment of your institutions general education outcomes?

  3. Why are the answers important? • Lack of knowledge leads to lackluster behaviors • Not knowing the why behind the what leads to misunderstandings • Not using common learning standards for all students in all programs leads to inequitable, unstable practices • The Higher Learning Commission expects that we can answer everything we just discussed re. gen. ed. objectives.

  4. HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation • Core Component 3A: The institution’s degree programs are appropriate to higher education • Learning goals are consistent • Core Component 3A: The institution’s degree programs are appropriate to higher education

  5. HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation • Core Component 3B: The institution exercises/assesses inquiry and the acquisition, application, and integration of broad learning skills • Core Component 3B: Gen Ed program is appropriate to the mission, educational offerings and degrees of the institutions

  6. Institutional Reflection • In 2010, KCC was prompted to reflect on our Gen ed outcomes • Were they meaningful? • Meaning, were they truly gauged to assess gen ed program? • Were they comprehensive and broad? • Were they easily assessable? • HLC Core Component 4B: The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning.

  7. What we had: The dense 7

  8. Long story short. . .Findings: • Our gen ed outcomes were inadequate • Assessment hampered by vague, immeasurable outcomes • We realized we could do better • Both at identifying what our gen ed program was • And at designing useful, meaningful assessment instruments and practices. • We needed a systematic approach to assessing more cogently constructed outcomes

  9. Academic Quality Institute • KCC received consultation from AQI in 2010-2011 • Joined by two other community colleges • Met monthly on each other’s campuses to review and revise gen ed outcomes • Also designed measurement tools • Rubrics and indicators

  10. Involved the review/revision process? • The VP (KCC’s CAO) • MSE, HSS, Bus. Tech. Associate Deans • faculty representatives • Math Science Engineering • Humanities Social Sciences • Health Careers • Business/Technology • Director of Horticulture/Agriculture • Office of Institutional Research

  11. Extensive months of rewriting process • Comparing with other institutions • Brainstorming—Poster board sessions • Wrestling with words • Sometimes wrestling with each other!! • Stripped away vague outcomes • Crafted a simpler, assessable set • In the end, we found fewer but more direct/implicit outcomesto be more effective

  12. Out with the old, in with the simpler: • Communication: Students will communicate with precision, clarity, fluency, accuracy, and coherence through their reading, writing, and verbal communications. • Quantitative Reasoning: Students will reason and solve quantitative problems from a wide array of contexts. • Ethical Reasoning: Students will apply skills in ethical reasoning and come to understand the ways ethical issues affect individual behaviors, individual lifestyles, and public life. • Inquiry and Analysis: Students will examine complex topics and apply systematic processes resulting in formed conclusions.

  13. College-Wide Review process • Started with faculty-led assessment committee • Faculty were given opportunity to assess • All levels of administration reviewed • Advisory councils informed and invited to provide input. • AQIP systems portfolio question 1P1: How do you determine which common or shared objectives for learning and development you should hold for all students pursuing degrees at a particular level? Whom do you involve in setting these objectives?

  14. But the title of this presentation is. . . • General Education Outcomes: Reviewing, Revising, and Implementing Assessment • So how do you do that? • Valid instruments needed • Management software needed to make data useful

  15. To systematize our assessment practices • To segment student data according to ethnicity, gender, age, and academic proficiency • To provide an accessible archive • To help develop cogent learning-improvement plans based on specific data

  16. Reading Comprehension Objective

  17. Verbal Communication Objective

  18. Written Communication Objective

  19. Ethical Reasoning Objective

  20. Inquiring & Analysis Objective

  21. Quantitative Reasoning Objective

  22. Next step—Pilot the process • Pilot Participants: • Professor of Education • Professor of English • Professor of Nursing • Professor of Speech • Professor of Developmental Writing • Professor of Radiography

  23. Yes! A new Acronym! • Each participant sought occasions for assessment (OFAs) in Communication • Writing • Reading • Verbal Gen ed pilot ran in 5 courses, 9 sections, with 174 students total

  24. Some cool reading results!!

  25. Some awesome writing results!

  26. Some Very fine verbal results

  27. On to a systematized process

  28. Contact: • Mark Lanting mlanting@kcc.edu • 815-802-8709

More Related