From satisfaction to impact assessing faculty learning and development
Download
1 / 16

From Satisfaction to Impact: Assessing Faculty Learning and Development - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 130 Views
  • Uploaded on

From Satisfaction to Impact: Assessing Faculty Learning and Development. 2013 POD Network Conference Pittsburgh, PA Megan Rodgers, Ph.D. student ([email protected]) Cara Meixner, Ph.D. ([email protected]). Think about this prompt, then engage with a person you don’t know well:

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

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' From Satisfaction to Impact: Assessing Faculty Learning and Development' - luisa


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
From satisfaction to impact assessing faculty learning and development
From Satisfaction to Impact: Assessing Faculty Learning and Development

2013 POD Network Conference

Pittsburgh, PA

Megan Rodgers, Ph.D. student ([email protected])

Cara Meixner, Ph.D. ([email protected])


Quick diagnostic think pair share

Think about this prompt, then engage with a person you don’t know well:

What are the opportunities and challenges related to assessing faculty development?

Personally, how do you feel about systematic assessment of faculty development?

Quick Diagnostic:Think, Pair, Share


Outcomes

  • As don’t know well:a result of participating in this interactive session, participants will:

  • Be able to explain the assessment cycle and the levels of assessment affiliated with Kirkpatrick’s model;

  • Be able to express hopes and concerns about assessment;

  • Have at least one idea of how assessment could positively affect their office.

Outcomes


Moving from satisfaction to i mpact
Moving from Satisfaction to don’t know well:Impact


Why assessment
Why Assessment? don’t know well:

  • Call for faculty developers to move beyondsatisfaction;

  • Minimal evidence in literature of rigorous faculty development program evaluation; and(Chism & Szabo, 1997; Hines, 2009; Kucsera & Svinicki, 2010)

  • Faculty self report data may be inaccurate. (Ebert-May, Hodder, Momsen, Long, & Jardeleze, 2011)


Kirkpatrick s model

Kirkpatrick’s Model don’t know well:


Four Levels of Evaluation don’t know well:

Group Activity

Self-select into one of the four levels of evaluation. Within your group, designate a scribe and presenter.

Consider an outcome appropriate to the level of evaluation you selected.

In your fantasy land (unlimited resources), what evidence would you want to give to your Provost to showcase effectiveness in this area?

Kirkpatrick (1978)


Assessment cycle
Assessment Cycle don’t know well:

1

7

2

3

6

5

4


Sharing of materials and don’t know well:data.

Objective refinement

Essence of all original objectives maintained

External perspective helped clarify

Missing objectives?

Forums (unstructured focus groups) with jmUDESIGN graduates

Inclusion of “affective” objectives

  • Establishing Objectives

1


Complete! don’t know well:

Minor modifications

  • Mapping Objectives to Programming

2


3

  • 3 Surveys (Pre, Post, Post 2)

    • Aligned to outcomes

  • Embedded “Articulation” assignment

    • Facilitator used a rubric to evaluate

    • “Direct Measure”


4

  • Is the program being implemented as planned?

    • With a detailed plan, you can have participants, facilitators, and/or an independent observer “check” the fidelity of the program


  • Analyzing Data

5

6

  • Various sources and time-points of data

  • Graduate student maintains and analyzes data

  • Used a “unique identifier” to match responses


7

  • Program Improvement

    • Fidelity data

  • Proof of Program Effectiveness

    • Can now speak about direct outcomes of the program


Action planning
Action Planning don’t know well:


References
References don’t know well:

Chism, N. V. N., & Szabó, B. (1997). How faculty development programs evaluate their services. Journal of Staff, Program, and Organization Development, 15(2), 55-62.

Ebert-May, D., Derting, T. L., Hodder, J., Momsen, J. L., Long, T. M., & Jardeleza, S. E. (2011). What we say is not what we do: effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. BioScience, 61(7), 550-558.

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences. (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hines, S.R. (2009). Investigating Faculty Development Program Assessment Practices: What's Being Done and How Can It Be Improved?. The Journal of Faculty Development, 23(3), 5-19.

Kucsera, J. V., & Svinicki, M. (2010). Rigorous evaluations of faculty development programs. The Journal of Faculty Development, 24(2), 5-18.

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1978). Evaluating In-House Training Programs. Training and Development Journal, 32(9), 6-9.

Kirkpatrick, D.L., & Kirkpatrick, J.D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.


ad