Darrell J. Henry Dept. of Geology and Geophysics Louisiana State University, USA

1. The role of Mineralogy-Petrology-Geochemistry courses in programmatic learning outcomes and their assessment Darrell J. Henry Dept. of Geology and Geophysics Louisiana State University, USA

2. Fear and loathing … of assessment “This is just another bunch of paperwork that the administration wants that will do no good. It is a waste of time!” “Tell us what you want us to write.” “The results of assessment will probably be used against the faculty.” “Our program is perfectly fine.” “Once I have done it, do I have to change it?”

3. Student learning outcomes • Specific statements that describe the required learning achievement that is intended to be met upon attaining: • Competency in a course • The goals of a degree program • Typically a snapshot at/near the end of a course or degree program

4. Assessment • The systematic and continuous method of gathering, analyzing and using information from measured outcomes as a feedback to improve student learning. • Four levels of assessment • Individual student assessment (grade) • Course assessment (specific course) • Program assessment (academic and support programs related to a degree) • Institutional assessment (campus-wide characteristics)

5. Institutional assessment The goal – to retain accreditation, a voluntary, independent review of educational programs to determine that the education provided is of uniform and sound quality. • Six US regional accreditation agencies for college and university higher education programs: • The Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. • The New England Association of Schools & Colleges. • The North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. • The Northwest Association of Schools And Colleges. • The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. • The Western Association of Schools and Colleges.

6. Common format - an assessment matrix for each degree program

7. Typical University-level Criteria for Evaluation of Degree Program Assessment • Quality of core learning outcomes statements • Do they comprehend the program? • Are the core outcomes measurable? • Measures for determining levels of achievement of learning outcomes • What are direct and indirect measures of assessment of learning outcomes? • Who is responsible for implementation of assessment procedures? • When are they measured ? (They are best if they are ongoing.) • Use of results • Has entire faculty discussed results of assessment? • Have results been used to lead to program improvement (e.g., changes in curricular structure, teaching and learning strategies, etc.) or indicate aspects of curriculum that appear to be working well?

8. What is direct assessment and how can we measure it? Direct assessment – assessment based on an analysis of student behaviors or products in which they demonstrate how well they have mastered learning outcomes* • Strategies for direct assessment of student learning • Published tests (e.g. former Geology GRE) • Locally-developed tests (e.g. exit exams) • Embedded assignments and course activities (more later) • Portfolios • Collective portfolios * Information modified from: Mary Allen (2008) Strategies for Direct and Indirect Assessment of Student Learning. SACS 2008 Annual Meeting

9. What is indirect assessment and how can we measure it? Indirect assessment – assessment based on an analysis of reported perceptions about student mastery of learning outcomes.* This category is most useful in program review. • Strategies for indirect assessment of student learning • Surveys (e.g. student exit survey) • Interviews (e.g. student exit interviews) • Focus groups near time of completion of degree • Grades (generally) * Information modified from: Mary Allen (2008) Strategies for Direct and Indirect Assessment of Student Learning. SACS 2008 Annual Meeting

10. Properties of Good Assessment Techniques • Valid – directly reflects learning outcome being assessed • Reliable – especially true for inter-rater reliability • Actionable– results help identify what students are learning well and what requires more attention • Efficient and cost-effective • Engaging to students and other respondents– more likely to demonstrate the extent of their learning • Interesting to faculty – they should care about results and be willing to act on them • Triangulation– multiple lines of evidence point to same conclusion * Information modified from: Mary Allen (2008) Strategies for Direct and Indirect Assessment of Student Learning. SACS 2008 Annual Meeting

11. LSU student learning outcomes – BS in Geology Learning outcome 1. Students will understand how fundamental processes (chemical, biological, and physical) have affected Earth. Learning outcome 2. Students will develop the ability to conduct and to analyze field-based geologic problems by learning field methodology for multiple types of geological investigations and by using these methods to practice the scientific method in a field setting. Learning outcome 4. Students will demonstrate their ability to solve complex geologic problems.

12. Focus on a single learning outcome LSU Geology BS learning outcome 3. “Students will develop the ability to effectively communicate geologic concepts and material to the public and professional colleagues in written and oral formats” 2009 – Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology is designated means of assessment

13. Course-embedded research projects –Potential benefits • Individual student grades • Introduction into culture of research • Venue for developing scientific communications skills • Relatively noninvasive way to address degree program learning outcomes

14. Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology:Class-based Petrologic Research in an Outcrop-challenged State? You need to adapt!

15. Pet Rock Project: 1996-present • Semester-long project (Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology) integrated in fabric of course • “Field experience” - random selection of rock in a box • Research experience - processing pet rock sample, petrographic and analytical data acquisition, and petrologic interpretation • Communication skills - professional-level written report and oral presentation

16. Samples – “Field work” • Archean rocks from Beartooth Mtns, MT • Great diversity of rocks • Geologic complexity • Virtual field context • Field photos • Google Earth

17. Ownership and Responsibility of Pet Rock Each sample is given a personal name and introduced to class • Examples: “Pierre”, “Bubba”, “Freckles”, “Big-Al”… Each student processes sample for thin sectioning

18. Introduction to Tools Available for Project • Advanced tools • SEM imaging - BSE • EDS (mineral ID), electron microprobe spot analyses and data handling • Simple tools • Optical microscopy • Optical CL

19. Beartooth Mtns Sample – Example Petrographic Information • Peraluminousmigmatite • Assemblage: Sil + Grt + Crd + Bt + Qtz + Pl + Kfs + Rt • Clustering of Sil and Bt • Interpreted as a metatexite

20. Beartooth Mtns Sample – Example Analytical data and Interpretation • Peraluminousmigmatite • Quantitative spot analyses • Mineral normalization schemes • Application of TWQ - peak metamorphic conditions • Consistency with biotite dehydration melting scenario • Possible retrograde path

21. Communicating the Science How do we make the science known? CxC mission: Enhancing learning experiences for students and improving their written, spoken, visual presentation, and technological communication skills

22. LSU CxC Initiative – Communication-intensive certification • communication for learning and for formal sharing of ideas publicly • Emphases on at least 2 of the CxC components: written, spoken, visual, or technological communication • Student/faculty ratio of 35:1 • Genres appropriate to discipline or profession • Class time spent on communication (and revision required) • Faculty member involvement in evaluation • 40% of course grade based on communication

23. Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology CI components (oral and written) • Oral presentations • Preparation: effective oral presentation by CI studio coordinator (week 1) • Volcano Presentation (week 3) • Pet Rock Project Presentation – embedded research project (week 13 and 15) • Written contribution • Pet Rock Project – 10+ page research project written in the style of a professional petrology paper (week 13 and 15)

24. Pet Rock – Speaking at the Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology Symposium Professional-style oral presentation expectations • Day-long Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology Symposium • Symposium program • 12 minute talk with 3 minute question period • Student-moderated • Student evaluated with evaluation forms used previously

25. Rubric for evaluation of oral communications (instructor/students)

26. Rubric for evaluation of written communications (instructor) Individual student assessment Each category weighted depending on relative importance

27. Transforming student scoring rubrics into degree program assessment LSU Geology BS learning outcome: “Students will develop the ability to effectively communicate geologic concepts and material to the public and professional colleagues in written and oral formats” 2009 – Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology is designated means of assessment • Repurpose the individual scoring rubric to consider each category • Goal: direct assessment of learning outcome • Renormalize on a 5-point basis • Investigate the group statistics • Develop threshold levels (and then re-examine)

28. Assessment results and feedback Initial information/basis for improvement

29. Inter-rater reliability • Common projects (9 students) in two classes • Two independent evaluations of writing from two faculty members

30. Lessons learned • Carefully define function of learning outcome(s) (e.g. course vs. degree program). • Be proactive with on-campus assessment groups to establish what is right for your program • Build course-embedded projects – i.e. use resources you have available • Have enough detail in rubric to examine essential components of learning outcome(s) • Transform from individual student scoring to a rubric useful for assessment • Use results to improve course/program or assessment procedure

31. Resources • Fava, C.H. and Henry, D.J. (2009) Professional Communications Projects: Training science students to communicate. Pedagogy in Action, Science Education Resource Center (SERC) website. http://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/communications_curricula/index.html. • Henry, D. J. (2009) Rubrics in a communications-intensive geology-majors course: Their roles in departmental assessment. Workshop of “Assessing Geoscience Programs: Theory and Practice” "On the Cutting Edge – Geoscience Programs: Developing Pathways to Strong Programs for the Future" series. http://serc.carleton.edu/departments/program_assessment/program.html • LSU Communications across the Curriculum Program.http://www.cxc.lsu.edu/Home.html