1 / 9

Types of Learning Outcomes

Types of Learning Outcomes. Instructional Course Level SLO’s Program Level SLO’s ILO’s Non-Instructional Service Unit Outcomes Today: Instructional only!. Goals. Meet ACCJC proficiency standards for SLO’s Retain all benefits of current system

calla
Download Presentation

Types of Learning Outcomes

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. Types of Learning Outcomes • Instructional • Course Level SLO’s • Program Level SLO’s • ILO’s • Non-Instructional • Service Unit Outcomes Today: Instructional only!

  2. Goals • Meet ACCJC proficiency standards for SLO’s • Retain all benefits of current system • Provide additional useful data to faculty/departments for assessment analysis & program review • Use SLO-ILO mapping data to assess student progress on ILO’s • Provide centralized data warehouse to be accessed in support of planning and institutional self evaluation

  3. Conduct Assessments Implement Plans Analyze Results, Develop Plans Course SLO’s - Current Pros: • Custom fit to dept needs • Effectively delivers section level data to faculty Cons: • No central housing so not accessible for institutional inquiries • Organized by section, not by student so no tracking of student progress on ILO’s • No student characteristic dataavailable to faculty

  4. Conduct Assessments Integrate Student Behavior/Characteristics Data Implement Plans Analyze Results, Develop Plans Course SLO’s - Proposed Pros: • Custom fit to departmental needs • Effectively delivers section level data to faculty • Adds student characteristics to data received by faculty/depts • Enables Institutional Research to assess ILO’s via mapping • Assists student services in assessing effectiveness • Can reduce data gathering responsibilities in depts Cons: • Requires entry of SLO assessment results by student

  5. Current 1 SLO per semester, cycle through all SLO’s - has drawback that a lot of time can pass before faculty get feedback on changes they made in response to data Proposed Each department makes its own plan -- cycle through, do all once every x years, etc. Tie plan to program review cycle Each SLO must be assessed at least once per Program Review cycle Course SLO Assessment Timeline

  6. Current Departments all conduct own assessment of both discipline and department level SLO’s, one per year/semester Proposed “Program” defined as certificate or degree, not department Dept’s may opt to eliminate discipline & department level SLO’s We must write and assess SLO’s for each certificate/degree (same as ILO’s?) ??? Program Level SLO’s

  7. Current Departments develop and implement own assessment tools Assess 1 ILO each year, skip accreditation and program review years = 6 year cycle Proposed Institutional Research uses course SLO data and ILO map to assess ILO’s on an ongoing basis If needed, we could include surveys of student cohorts Institutional Learning Outcomes

  8. Quick SMC Mock Ups http://homepage.smc.edu/merlic_jennifer/SLO

  9. Santa Barbara City College Model http://slo.sbcc.edu/docs/enterScores/eLumen%20Scoring%20Handout.pdf

More Related