Using Institutional Learning Outcomes to Foster Meaningful Dialogue and Decision-Making

1. Using Institutional Learning Outcomes to Foster Meaningful Dialogue and Decision-Making Giovanni Sosa, Ph.D. Chaffey College RP Conference 2013

2. ACCJC Standards The Standards (pg.1) Instructional programs, student support services, and library and learning support services facilitate the achievement of the institution's stated student learning outcomes

3. ACCJC Standards Improving Institutional Effectiveness (IB) The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support student learning, measures that learning, assesses how well learning is occurring, and makes changes to improve student learning…

4. ACCJC Standards Improving Institutional Effectiveness (IB) …[it] demonstrates its effectiveness by providing 1) evidence of the achievement of student learning outcomes…

5. Learning Outcomes Statement Means of Assessment Use of Results Summary of Evidence Criteria SLO Assessment is a continual process!

6. Core Competencies • Adopted Institutional SLOs • Communication • Critical Thinking & Information Competency • Community/Global Awareness & Responsibility • Personal, Academic, and & Career Development http://www.chaffey.edu/general_info/competencies.shtml

7. Critical Thinking Facione (1990) • 46 experts were convened to discuss role of CT in educational assessment and instruction • Identified Core CT skills and Sub-Skills

8. Critical Thinking: Core CT SKills • Interpretation – To comprehend/express meaning of wide variety of experiences • Analysis – Identify inferential relationships among statements/concepts • Evaluation – Assess the credibility of statements; assess logical strength of inferential statements/concepts • Inference – Form hypotheses

9. Critical Thinking: Core CT SKills 5) Explanation – To state results of one’s reasoning; 6) Self-Regulation – Self-reflection of one’s views to question or confirm reasoning

10. Critical Thinking Assessment • MSLQ (Pintrich, McKeachie, & Lin, 1987) • Developed in process of studying how to make students more efficient learners • What does the CT assessment specifically measure?

11. Critical Thinking Assessment • CT assessment found to be statistically associated to course performance (r = .15)

12. Global Awareness (Clarke, 2004) • Pertains to issues of cultural diversity, human rights, and prejudice reduction – both within national borders and across national borders • Knowledge that individual possesses of other cultures (Cognitive) • The extent to which individual empathizes with values of other cultures (Affective) • Willingness to take stand on cultural issues (Participatory)

13. Global Awareness Assessment • Inspired by Global Perspective Institute (Braskamp et al., 2011) • Holistic Human Development: • Cognitive domain (“Whatdo I know?”) • Intrapersonal domain (“”Who am I?”) • Interpersonal domain (“How do I relate to others?”) • What does our Global Awareness assessment specifically measure?

14. Results: Course Characteristics • 1907 Total Responses • 78 Courses • 33 Departments • Chemistry (N = 199) • English (N = 195) • Theatre (N =159) • Cinema (N = 154) • CIS (N = 137) • Economics (N = 102) • Voluntary Participation

15. Results: Course Characteristics Comparison with District Data (SP12) Transfer Status

16. Results: Course Characteristics Comparison with District Data (SP12) Distance Learning

17. Results: Course Characteristics Comparison with District Data (SP12) Basic Skills

18. Results: Student Characteristics Comparison with District Data (SP12) Performance Indicators

19. Results: Student Characteristics Comparison with District Data (SP12) Performance Indicators

20. Critical Thinking

21. Critical Thinking: Levels

22. CT Differences by Demographics/Course Transfer Status Variables Examined: • First Generation Status • Gender • Age Range • Parents’ Education • Ethnicity • UC/CSU Transfer vs. Non-Transferable

23. CT Differences by Performance Indicators Variables Examined: • Success Rate • Withdrawal Rate • GPA Converted Grades • Units Attempted • Units Completed • Cum. GPA • Assessment Tests (Reading Comp/Sentence Skills/ Math)

24. CT Differences by Performance Indicators: Units Attempted

25. CT Differences by Performance Indicators: Units Earned

26. CT Differences by Performance Indicators: Cum. GPA

27. Global Awareness

28. Global Awareness: Levels

29. GA Differences by Demographics/Course Transfer Status Variables Examined: • First Generation Status • Gender • Age Range • Parents’ Education • Ethnicity • UC/CSU Transfer vs. Non-Transferable

30. GA Differences by Age Range

31. GA Differences by Performance Indicators Variables Examined: • Success Rate • Withdrawal Rate • GPA Converted Grades • Units Attempted • Units Completed • Cum. GPA • Assessment Tests (Reading Comp/Sentence Skills/ Math)

32. GA Differences by Performance Indicators: Units Attempted

33. GA Differences by Performance Indicators: Units Earned

34. GA Differences by Performance Indicators: Sentence Skills

35. Relationship between CT and GA?

36. Conclusions • Enhancing institutional effectiveness • Self-reflective dialogue • Utilized assessments serve as reliable tools for measuring CT and GA • But may not adequately measure all aspects of corresponding competency • More assessment of foundation/online courses • Implications of units attempted/earned & GPA

37. Institutional Response to Findings • Random sampling for Spring 2013 • Inclusion of two additional core competencies for Spring 2013 • Division-wide assessment during Fall 2012 • Application to specific course level assessment • First Annual Student Services Poster Session

38. References Braskamp, L. A., D. C. Braskamp, K. C. Merrill, & M. E. Engberg (2011). Global Perspective Inventory. Global Perspective Institute, Inc., http://gpi.central.edu Clark, V. (2004). Students’ global awareness and attitudes to internationalism in a world of cultural convergence. Journal of Research in International Education, 3, 51-70. Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. American Philosophical Association (pgs. 13 -19). Newark, DE. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC.