ge program assessment ay 05 06
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 114 Views
  • Uploaded on

GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06. Goal – Provide valid, reliable information on student performance in foundational domains of GE that can: guide GE review suggest curricular changes to enhance student learning

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 'GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06' - shadow


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
ge program assessment ay 05 06
GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06
  • Goal – Provide valid, reliable information on student performance in foundational domains of GE that can:
    • guide GE review
    • suggest curricular changes to enhance student learning
  • AY 05-06: Assessment of 3 broad domains – writing, quantitative reasoning, oral communication
ge program assessment ay 05 061
GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06
  • Need to move beyond usual course-level assessment
    • GE Program Assessment is called for in AAO MOU that administers GE on campus
  • How are our students doing in the broad skill/knowledge domains covered in GE?
    • Can’t be answered by course-level assessment
solving the ge assessment puzzle
Solving the GE Assessment puzzle …
  • Manageable, Meaningful, Sustainable
    • Manageable: don’t want to overburden already hard working faculty
    • Meaningful: provide valid, reliable information of relevance to questions of academic quality
    • Sustainable: KISS rule … assessment must be an ongoing process
methodology
Methodology
  • Mission, Goals, Student Learning Outcomes model … adapting assessment methods used for baccalaureate programs to GE
    • Mission, goals provided by EM 99-05
    • Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for GE derived, by faculty, from GE goals
    • Student performance on SLOs observed/ measured in GE courses
  • Assessment results analyzed, guide curricular change and reform
methodology cont d
Methodology (cont’d)
  • Direct Assessment: Measure/observe actual student performance on the skills/knowledge we value (SLOs)
  • Embedded Assessment: Measure/ observe student performance on existing tasks
  • Close the Loop: Results guide changes aimed at improving student learning
structure
Structure
  • GE on this campus governed by a series of “rules”
    • Title 5, EO 595, EM 99-05, AAO-MOU
      • http://www.csuchico.edu/prs/EMs/EM99/em99_05.htm
      • http://www.csuchico.edu/vpaa/manual/MOU.pdf
      • http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-595.pdf
  • GEAC advises Provost on GE, including assessment
  • AURA responsible for assisting faculty with baccalaureate program and GE assessment
  • Need to build collaborative structure
slide7
Provost

Coordinating Committee: AURA Chair, GEAC Chair, Dean Undergraduate Studies

GEAC

General Education Advisory Committee

AURA

All University Responsibility

for Assessment Committee

Task Forces: 1 (Oral Communication), 2 (Writing), 3 (Quantitative reasoning). Each Task Force has an AURA member, GEAC member, and an additional faculty member.

process
Process
  • Goal: GE Program Assessment must be Manageable, Meaningful, Sustainable
  • Participatory … faculty input
    • How to build-in faculty input?
  • Produce valid, reliable, timely results
  • Consequential … results should guide GE reform
process cont d
Process (cont’d)
  • Task Forces are working groups that lead effort
  • Task Forces consult with additional faculty throughout process
  • Task Forces coordinate efforts, do much of the actual work involved
  • Task Forces report results to Provost and campus community
slide10
Task Force 1: Oral Communication Ruth Guzley, AURA, CMST, Chair Mitch Johns, GEAC, AGRIC Susan Avanzino, CMST Additional faculty with expertise, interest

Coordinating

Committee:

1. Fernlund (AURA), 2. Loker (Dean UED) 3. Alger (GEAC)

  • Task Force 2: Writing
  • Chris Fosen, GEAC, ENGL, Chair
  • Sarah Blackstone, AURA, HFA
  • Judith Rodby, ENGL
  • Additional faculty with expertise, interest
  • Task Force 3: Quantitative Reasoning Margaret Owens, AURA, NS, Chair Russ Mills, GEAC, CIVL Jack Ladwig, MATH Additional faculty with expertise, interest
process cont d1
Process (cont’d)
  • Using EM 99-05, Task Forces define SLOs, in consultation with faculty
  • Using SLOs, Task Forces work with faculty to analyze curriculum, determine “sites for assessment”
  • Task Forces work with faculty to select assignments for “embedded assessment”
process cont d2
Process (cont’d)
  • Task Forces, in collaboration with faculty, devise rubrics for assessing student work
  • Student work collected (Spring 06) using STEPS process where possible
    • http://www.cob.csuchico.edu/steps/
  • Task Forces and faculty work to achieve “inter-rater reliability” in assessing student work
process cont d3
Process (cont’d)
  • Task Forces and faculty assess student work using rubrics and standards agreed upon for this purpose
  • Assessment results analyzed with an eye to spotting areas for improvement in student performance, curriculum
  • Results and recommendations written up and conveyed to Provost, campus
slide14
1. Task Forces Formed

9/05

2. Task Forces consult with faculty on GE SLOs 10/05

3. Task Forces & faculty analyze curriculum for “assessment sites” 10-11/05

4. Task Forces & faculty select assignments, develop rubrics, 11/05

6. Assessment of student work by Task Forces & faculty April-May 06

5. Student work collected from appropriate courses Sp 06

7. Assessment results analyzed and written up Summer 06

8. Results reported to Provost, campus August 06

outcomes
Outcomes
  • Assessment results form basis for change/reform of GE
  • Further GE Program Assessment carried out in AY 06-07 … critical thinking and breadth areas
  • Assess assessment: How’d we do?
  • GE reforms designed and implemented in AY 07-08?
conclusion
Conclusion
  • “Jazz” assessment: new process, will require creativity, improvisation
  • Participatory assessment … faculty input
  • “Learning” organization … we need to learn about GE
  • Culture of evidence … change in GE should be based on evidence
  • Focus on student learning … #1 priority
  • Transparency and accountability … no hidden agendas
ad