A Collaborative Model for Incorporating High Impact Educational Practices in GE/Gerontology Courses
1 / 1

Project Outcomes Compass IIA & IIB - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

A Collaborative Model for Incorporating High Impact Educational Practices in GE/Gerontology Courses Promoting Student Motivation, Engagement, & Retention: A Two Step Process ~ “ Compass IIA & IIB ” Cheryl Osborne, EdD , MSN ~ CSUS

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Project Outcomes Compass IIA & IIB' - astin

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

A Collaborative Model for Incorporating High Impact Educational Practices in GE/Gerontology Courses

Promoting Student Motivation, Engagement, & Retention: A Two Step Process ~ “Compass IIA & IIB”

Cheryl Osborne, EdD, MSN ~ CSUS

Anne Laurel Marenco, PhD & Patty Robinson PhD ~ College of the Canyons

Grace Austin, MA, C.A.G.S & Pam Flaherty, MA Sacramento City College

Jolene Fassbinder MSG, MACM & Rachel Price, MSG ~ California Council of Gerontology & Geriatrics



Findings and Useful Suggestions ~ Voices of the Partners~ Con’t

Findings and Useful Suggestions~

Voices of the Partners

Project Outcomes Compass IIA & IIB

Challenges ~ Voices of the Partners

  • Methods used when developing/modifying,

  • implementing, and evaluating learning outcomes

  • and High Impact Practices (HIP) for in class,

  • hybrid, and online gerontology course formats

  • Pam:

  • Develop and use grading rubrics including AACU Value Indicators (Civic engagement & Integrative Learning)

  • Modify amount of reading and testing to measuring > non-test” work – found I to be higher quality and >> relevant

  • Rethink Service Learning as an “option” (ie exchanging one test for work done in SL Collaborations)

  • Grace:

  • Use more collaborative assignments in future classes (reported meaningful by most students). (The challenge will be to find assessment measures to sufficiently illustrate individual growth.)

  • Incorporate SL into future classes (need to investigate risk management issues at this institution and locating appropriate community partners who are willing to provide the opportunity)

  • Create a suitable assessment and outcome measure to gauge effectiveness of experience

  • Anne/Patty:

  • Change from hybrid to face-to-face

  • SL yielded intended outcomes for those who completed it, however it should be mandatory, not optional

  • Course will be taught in a full semester format, not short term

  • Initiate and develop a statewide cross-systems partnership between CSU Sacramento, Sacramento City College, and College of the Canyons (COC) to explore a statewide General Education (GE) model which will better align the CSUs and Community Colleges and can serve as a model for colleges to pursue.

  • Link this partnership to the California Council on Gerontology & Geriatrics (CCGG), an organization that fosters communication among gerontology educators and researchers statewide. This linkage facilitates the formation of a statewide advisory group to guide the project from a statewide and cross-systems perspective.

  • Initiate a conversation to explore how to improve practices for GE, as well as how to actively and creatively involve students in their learning process (Compass IIA).

  • Identify, choose (Compass IIA), develop Tool Kit, implement, and evaluate (Compass IIB) learning outcomes measuring active learning (HIPS) in courses specifically focusing on basic skills, student engagement and motivation, and research practices that result in a “work-ready” education while making GE courses more relevant and purposeful to students.

  • Examine how interdisciplinary content, like aging, can fill an important role across educational systems while addressing key State workforce needs.

  • Disseminate Tool Kit & lessons learned state and nationally.

  • Additional time and effort needed when approaching others with instructional ideas (rather than just implementing on own)

  • Collaborating on common assignments requires give and take; some elements perceived to be “critical” may not be evaluated in the same way as the other instructor – need to talk it out!

  • Assignments needed further tailoring based on the instructional format (Hybrid, face-to-face, online)

  • Hybrid – too short, not enough face-to-face time

  • Short term (8 week class – CoC) = not enough time for Service Learning

  • SL was an “option” (not required) – few completed project d/t time limitations (CoC)

  • Night class – attracted FT working students = over committed = didn’t complete project

  • Conclusions about ways that engage students

  • and make GE courses more purposeful and

  • relevant to personal lives and Careers

  • Pam:

  • Talk with students about HIPs; how they are used in the course; how they are fun and motivating

  • Begin each class topic with a personally relevant & motivating assessment or information to connect it with their worlds and generations

  • Use reading assignments as a background resource, and class as a place to explore and synthesize concepts & theories (less lecture)

  • Make tests open book/note – if they study they will know where to find info and synthesize/use it (> critical thinking)

  • Two novels were added to reading list to ↑ interest, connection, & motivation

  • Grace:

  • Financial/retirement planning documents or resources for individuals their age and a decade older

  • Resources about living environments for older adults

  • Students presented findings in small groups  whole class;

  • information was synthesized and analyzed for relative importance & common themes

  • Student voices: assignments were very relevant and important; many were putting their plans into actions since learning about it and were evaluating elder family members’ environments for safety issues

  • Anne/Patty:

  • Interviews & various in-class collaborative strategies were purposefully

  • designed to make the content more relevant and personal

  • SL experiences and novel analyses put a “real face” on the issue/concern/condition > than a textbook

  • SL provided direct “hands-on” exposure

  • Abstract becomes Real

  • Course content, experiences, & basic skills that

  • provide students with a more thought-provoking

  • and a “work ready” education

  • Pam:

  • Basic research & library skills

  • Communication with elders, other students, group collaboration, how to get along with people,

  • Being responsible to self and others,

  • Synthesizing and evaluating importance of information

  • Grace:

  • Health promotion & disease prevention behavior

  • Scores dramatically increased from the beginning to the end of the semester (mean scores ↑ from 5-8.77) on a 10 question T & F assessment on Gerontology Core principles

  • Student voices: two students no longer believe depression is a normal part of aging & now approach their clients differently!

  • Anne/Patty:

  • Time management when planning and completing interviews

  • Expected to be courteous, polite, & professional (dress, language) when contacting (phone or email) and interviewing

  • Writing and communication skills stressed

Overall Successes ~ Voices of the Partners

  • Everyone worked together as a Team and completed roles/tasks on time

  • Faculty & administrators maintained a continuous dialog and provided both academic and social support in crafting coursework to meet the intended outcomes

  • Great collaboration, discussion, synergy among the systems

  • Students benefited by being exposed to a diversity of ideas &

  • approaches from two instructors (psych/soc connection)

  • Decided on meetings – when (touch bases at least monthly); how & where (1st two meetings face-to face (Discussed what we really wanted and were willing to do); other communication by email and conference calls); who (all stakeholders 1stmtg, then grantees only; presented to CCGG Board for feedback and input quarterly)

  • Discussed LEAP, HIP & Gero Competencies (face-to-face as a group then “course partners” (SCC – soc & psych; phone and email SCC & CoC – soc & soc courses)

  • Assessed of current course objectives & assignments (individual & course partners)

  • Made changes/additions to courses agreed on (objectives & assignments similar, if not identical)

  • Developed & completed Courses Mapping Tools (sample in Tool Kit)

  • Implemented course (individual & partner)

  • Evaluation (individual and group conference calls – formative & summative)

  • Presentation development (abstracts, PPT, Poster content review)

Project’s Distinguishing Features

Student & Faculty Evaluation Data Showed Impact ~ Voices of the Partners

  • Interdisciplinary & Inter-professional Partners (Gero, Soc, Psych)

  • Statewide Collaboration among Multiple campuses

  • (Northern & Southern California CSUS & Community Colleges &

  • California Council of Gerontology & Geriatrics (CCGG) a non-profit statewide

  • leadership organization dedicated to improving the quality of life of California’s

  • diverse aging population through focusing on education, workforce development

  • & advocacy by linking academic institutions (students & faculty), to legislators,

  • service providers, older adults and their families.

  • Focused on Educational and Career/Workforce Outcomes

  • Used previously GE approved courses to infuse HIPs & National Gero Competencies

  • Measured Civic Engagement & Integrative Learning in three courses with a variety of teaching modalities & characteristics: face-to-face, hybrid, various class times, one campus > urban than the other

  • Created course Mapping Tool toclarify individual course objectives, LEAP, HIPS, Gero Competencies & GE Learning Outcomes across campuses

  • Presented/discussed Project at Statewide CC Curriculum Workshop &

  • 3 Quarterly CCGG Board meetings

  • Partners’ Willingness to Examine, Change, & Evaluate Courses

  • Partners’ Collegiality – Communication, Flexibility & Responsibility

  • SL & Team Teaching really works – for students & faculty!!

  • Involving all Stakeholders essential to completing project outcomes

  • Need “structure” & individuals that support creativity, innovation, & flexibility

  • Preliminary data based on the first semester: three courses (n = 23, 25, & 30 before attrition) demonstrate possible directions for future implementation. More data from this semester will be incorporated to make final suggestions.

  • Course content must be applicable to a diverse audience; be aware of interviewing experience and how much contact students have had with elders (small amount  already working in a Gero field)

  • Students benefitted from the use of HIP:

  • Provided opportunities to engage in inductive & deductive reasoning

  • Encouraged community engagement & student success

  • Provided opportunities to write and think critically as well as provide analysis of real world situations (not just pass a test)

  • Engaged in self-reflection of different groups & cultures (making them more aware of issues & conditions affecting older adults)

  • Required students to apply abstract concepts to the real world

  • Helped students be able to synthesize observational data & connect to outcomes & everyday life

  • Provided opportunity to learn/practice desired workforce skills

  • Fostered interest in gerontology & sociology through real life

  • experiences

Successes ~ Our Project Process ~Voices of the Partners

Successes ~ Collaboration Builds Capacity Producing Desired Outcomes ~ Recommendations based on what worked!!Voices of the Partners

  • Choose Campus Stakeholders Carefully & Include them in the Initial Stages, (and periodically to Generate Buy-in & Support)

  • Choose Project Partners who are Content Experts & Flexible (not “married” to their content & able to adjust schedules)

  • Choose Partners who have Common Interest & Experience in the field(s) & have Knowledge and Experience about using HIPs & their Benefits (possibly ones you have collaborated with previously)

  • Choose “Curricular Change-Agent” Partners (with the Desire for new ventures, Openness to, and Knowledge of How to Make Curricular Change on their campuses)

  • Use a variety of communication formats (first meeting face-to-face, then can use conference calls, email, skype)

  • Cross reference course Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

  • across courses and institutions

  • Assign similar/identical assignments for students across institutions

Promising Aspects of Collaboration

  • Successful & creative Interdisciplinary, Inter-professional, Inter-campus and Statewide educational leadership organization Collaboration

  • Examining & Using Gerontology Courses to infuse LEAP, HIPs, & Gero Competencies providing students more “hand’s-on”, meaningful experiences

  • Including Workforce Needs in modified curriculum and then including it in evaluation process to provide students with needed employment skills

  • Faculty Development everyone learned more about LEAP, HIPS, and Gero Competencies and how to assess, incorporate, and use them in student learning situations;

  • Tool Kit completed (Includes LEAP, HIPs, Gero Competencies

  • and Mapping Tool)

  • Project’s overall success to date

Next Steps:

Lessons Learned ~ Voices of the Partners

  • There needs to be ongoing evaluation of cost-benefit ratio of student time: life requirements, course and assignment requirements

  • Offer SL in a face-to-face day course (discuss our course that is evening)

  • SL needs to be mandatory – incorporated in course

  • Keep more specific (written) learning examples from students

  • Implement again and re-revaluate Spring 2013 semester

  • Present to additional faculty (current campuses and other CC)

  • Identify other Gerontology GE courses for possible implementation

  • Continue including CCGG as an advisory group for analysis and dissemination to CSUs, CC, and private universities in California