1 / 28

Development of Student Learning Outcomes for GE:  lessons from a collaborative approach

Development of Student Learning Outcomes for GE:  lessons from a collaborative approach. Campus profile:. Enrollment of 21,500 1,100 full and part-time faculty (591 T/TT) ≈55% transfers. GE Governance:. GE committee (senate sub-committee) is responsible for:

raphael-powell
Download Presentation

Development of Student Learning Outcomes for GE:  lessons from a collaborative approach

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. Development of Student Learning Outcomes for GE:  lessons from a collaborative approach A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  2. Campus profile: Enrollment of 21,500 1,100 full and part-time faculty (591 T/TT) ≈55% transfers A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  3. GE Governance: • GE committee (senate sub-committee) is responsible for: • Review of new GE course proposals • Implementing and ensuring compliance with GE policy (syllabi review) • Recommending changes in GE policy A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  4. CSU Fresno GE Pattern

  5. CSU Fresno GE pattern: Iterative writing across the curriculum A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  6. History of GE Outcomes at Fresno State: • A set of learning outcomes was passed in 2003 • Written by one faculty member • 97 outcomes over 16 areas (1-10/area) A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  7. Some were not measureable: “Students deal with human social, political, and economic institutions and behavior and their historical background” Or “Students will be prepared to function in an international, multicultural society” A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  8. Some were really course intentions: “Students will  prepare at least six written presentations which receive oral or written critiques by the instructor.” or “Students will study the influence of major social, cultural, economic and political forces on societal behavior and institutions” A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  9. AAC&U, General Education and Assessment: Engaging Critical Questions, Fostering Critical Learning, Miami Fl Mar 1-3, 2007 A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  10. Premise: “In order to have a meaningful assessment of the GE program we need to start with a set of Student Learning Outcomes for each area that faculty truly embrace, implement and assess.” A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  11. Fall 2007 workshops • Faculty were invited to workshops to write outcomes by area (16 total). • Workshops led by individual GE Committee members • Major obstacles: • Lack of knowledge of the GE program • Lack of knowledge of the requirements of EO 595 • Even committee members didn’t always have a firm grasp on material • Without a starting point, they lacked focus A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  12. Fall 2007 workshops • Faculty were invited to workshops to write outcomes by area (16 total). • Workshops led by individual GE Committee members • Major obstacles: • Lack of knowledge of the GE program • Lack of knowledge of the requirements of EO 595 • Even committee members didn’t always have a firm grasp on material • Without a starting point, they lacked focus A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  13. Spring 2008 • Brought A1, A2 & A3 to meet with GE committee to work on outcomes • Worked for some areas (A2), while not others (A3) • Generally not enough time in a 2 hr meeting to have meaningful discussion A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  14. EO 1033 June 18, 2008 (requires outcomes based on LEAP framework) A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  15. LEAP Framework: Knowledge of human cultures and the physical and natural world Intellectual and practical skills Personal and social responsibility Integrative learning A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  16. Fall 2008 – Formation of GE Student Learning Outcomes Taskforce • Office of the Provost committed 9 WTU release time for 3 faculty (20% time / member) • Recommendations were sought from Deans and GEC Chair interviewed candidates • Chair of GEC (College of Agricultural Sciences) • One Faculty from History (College of Social Sciences) • One Faculty from Linguistics (College of Arts and Humanities) A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  17. Spring 2009 – Task Force Charged with: Work with faculty to develop learning outcomes for each area that fit within Leap Framework A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  18. Spring 2009 – Task Force Charged With: Suggest a plan for assessing these outcomes A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  19. The Process: Task force members wrote a first draft of outcomes which reflected EO 1033 and campus program description Generally limited to 3 outcomes per area Drafted the first area together, subsequent areas separately 2 hr meetings weekly A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  20. Workshops: • 2 hour workshops in each major area (A, B, C, D, E & MI) • Invited: • All faculty who had taught in the area (past 2 yrs) • All department chairs with courses in the area • Draft of outcomes went out with invitation along with EO1033, program description and LEAP framework • Invitation stressed importance of SLOs derived from the faculty as well as eventuality of assesment • Comments via email were welcomed A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  21. Workshops: At least two taskforce members and usually Dean of Undergraduate Studies attended each workshop Edits and suggestions were projected on screen A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  22. Revisions: Outcomes from workshop were distributed to same list of GE faculty with a three week comment period Comments were reviewed and incorporated Final draft was distributed to all faculty with another two week comment period A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  23. Approval Process: General Education Committee approved final draft in May 2009. Executive Committee reviewed in fall 2009 with a few minor edits Academic Senate reviewed on March 8 and 22 with approved with one edit A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  24. What Contributed to Our Success : Administration placed resources behind the effort EO 1033 A leadership team with knowledge of assessment Providing faculty with a draft as a starting point Transparency and openness to all input Stressing need for this to come from the faculty who are experts in the area A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  25. Assessment Plan: Centralized vs localized (dept level) models Discussed with Institutional Research & campus learning and assessment team A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  26. Departments Will Provide: The assignment (s) or piece(s) of student work to be assessed The rubric or assessment method to be used to measure the outcome The metric used to asses if a student has met the outcome A schedule for assessing each outcome (minimum of one learning outcome per year per course) A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  27. Reporting: Departments will provide a summary of assessment results as well as changes made as a result of assessment data in annual reports IRAP will compile and analyze data for GEC GEC will asses program based on aggregate data A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

  28. Future of GEC Move away from indirect compliance measures like syllabi review Move toward examining assessment data Evidence of how courses will meet outcomes and assessment plans will be required for new course approval A Lawson General Education in California Conference, CSU Fullerton May 4, 2010

More Related