Quality in Undergraduate Education QUE Http:www.gsu.eduque

1
Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE)
Http//www.gsu.edu/que
Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University Byron
Brown Valdosta State University Jackie Thornberry
Georgia Perimeter College Dee Abrahamse
California State University Long Beach
2
QUE Framing Questions

• What happens if we offer resources and support
  for reform of the curriculum to arts and sciences
  faculty at public universities and two-year
  collegesand ask them to work together?
• What if we ask them to describe what students
  ought to know and be able to do in their
  disciplines and then use that information to set
  standards for practice?
• Support provided by Pew Charitable Trusts and
  ExxonMobil Foundation

3
About QUE

• Faculty-driven
• Two-year/four-year partnerships - clusters
• Draft, voluntary student learning outcomes and
  standards in a discipline
• Standards at level 14 associate degree for
  major and non-major
• Standards at level 16 baccalaureate for major

4
How does QUE define standards?

• NPEC
• Learning outcome - the knowledge (facts,
  concepts, principles) and skills (processes,
  strategies, methods) to be learned
• Standard - a predetermined criterion of a level
  of student performance
• Assessment - the process of collecting
  data/evidence about student learning outcomes

5
Challenge of changing systems

• INSTRUCTIONAL PARADIGM
• Time held constant, learning varies
• Covering material
• Degree equals accumulated credit hours

• LEARNING PARADIGM
• Learning held constant, time varies
• Specified learning results
• Degree equals demonstrated knowledge and skills

6
Instructional Learning paradigm
paradigm

• Series of individual courses
• Coverage of material

• Develop learning outcomes
• Set standards
• Integrate experiences
• Define how to assess
• Develop pedagogy and develop supports

7
Grades and seat-time vs. learning outcomes

• Limitations of grading and sorting system
• Assessment as a program organizing principle
• Need to approach assessment as register of
  student progress through the program, not just in
  a particular course
• Curricular or program mapping

8
Conceptual Framework of QUE

• Stage 1 Development of each learning outcome
  associated with a major What should students
  know, understand, and be able to do?
• Learning outcomes for level 14
• Learning outcomes for level 16
• Disciplinary contributions to General
  Education learning outcomes or cross cutting
  literacies.

9
Level 16
B
H
I
I
O
S
L
T
QUE
O
O
----------------
G
R
-------------
----------------
Level
Y
Y
-------------
Foundation
14
-------------
to major
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
-------------
Introductory
Math
Sciences
English
History
core
Essential
Learning
Level
Social
English
Math
Sciences
12
Sciences
10
(No Transcript)
11
Conceptual Framework of QUE

• Stage 2 Development of evidence that a student
  has attained desirable proficiencies in a course
• Aligning assignment with learning outcome
• Developing scoring guides or rubrics
• Constructing performance standards for a
  learning outcome
• Scoring student work

12
Conceptual Framework of QUE

• Stage 3 Development of evidence that a student
  has attained desirable proficiencies in a
  program
• Analyzing program to determine learning outcomes
  for sequences of courses, using gap analysis or
  Super-matrix.
• Using the super-matrix, trace assessment of
  learning outcome through the program
• Developing aligned assessments so that a student
  can demonstrate growth through courses towards
  proficiency in the total program
• How do we capture student developmental progress
  as s/he proceeds randomly through a series of
  courses that make up a program?

13
Super-matrix or gap analysis

• For the matrix of courses within program,
  comparing program outcomes
• Does the course add significantly to the learning
  of the program outcome?
• Does the course add significantly to the
  assessment of the program outcome?

14
Super-matrix or gap analysis
 
15
Quality in Undergraduate (Humanities) Education
Designing Standards in the Humanities
Using Standards to . . . Reconfigure
Curriculum Transform Classrooms Empower
Students
16
Phase 1 Defining Standards for Change

• Stan d?rd (a)
• A flag, banner, or ensign . . . bearing
  heraldic devices distinctive of a person or
  corporation.
• Stan d?rd (b)
• An acknowledged measure of comparison for
  quantitative or qualitative value a criterion.

17
Phase 2 Using Standards to Reconfigure Our
Curriculum

• Writing on the Palimpsest of History
• Setting Expectations for Student Progress
• Gateway Courses
• ENGL 2060 (Introduction to English Studies)
• ENGL 3060 (Literary Research and Writing)
• Capstone Course
• ENGL 4900 (Senior Seminar)

18
Phase 3 Implementing Standards-Based Instruction

• Challenging, Purposeful Assignments
• Explicit, Transparent Performance Standards
• Clear, (Student-Designed?) Scoring Rubrics

19
Phase 4 Internalizing Standards within Students

• Student-developed Portfolios (to demonstrate
  proficiency in each standard)
• Reflective Introductions to Portfolio Selections
  (to give students ownership of the assessment
  process)
• A Senior Thesis (to address weaknesses,
  reinforce essential skills, and produce a writing
  sample for graduate school admission)

20
Two-year/Four-year interaction and student
transfer

• Difference in culture
• Importance of administrator involvement
• Sustained attention to relationships
• Common faculty concern for success of transfer
  students

21
Discussion Topics - mathematics

• Course alignment for transferability
• Tests, projects, handouts, portfolios
• Textbook selection
• End of course assessment

22
Outcomes

• Mathematical Modeling
• College Algebra/Precalculus
• Calculus Sequence

23
Embedding Assessments in History

• Performance standards in history focus on
  historical thinking and skills at survey,
  transfer and major levels
• Shared standards, rubrics, student work,
  assessments in rich conversations about
  historical thinking and learning
• Transparency as a theme

24
Level 14 standards in American and World History
(Salisbury)

• Broad standards, types of assignments tied to
  each standard (example interpreting primary and
  secondary documents)

25
Gateway Courses Historical Methodology (CSULB)

• Assessable competencies published to all students
• Assignments agreed on among sections
• Enforced as prerequisite to further courses in
  major
• Work forms basis of portfolio

26
Portfolio Assignments (Begun in Gateway) - CSULB

• Self-reflective essays gateway and capstone
• Examples of work (2-4 pieces each category)
• Historiography, theory papers
• Analytical work (primary source analysis,
  websites, etc)

27
Portfolio (continued)

• Mechanical skills (research proposal, computer
  literacy)
• Presentation oral presentation tape, Power
  Point, teaching unit
• Portfolio advisor meets with students throughout
  major
• Capstone seminar Research paper and
  presentation, portfolio review and assessment

28
Work in Progress

• Theory and Historiography course (gateway pt 2)
• Aligning assignments in other courses (portfolio
  demonstrates shortages in rest of curriculum)

29
Lessons Learned

• Focus on sharing ideas about learning in the
  discipline, with others in the field
• Quality of learning improves brings other
  faculty in
• Its intensive, and committed faculty need
  support to do it
• Institution needs to be clear about its value in
  reward system

30
Connecting Public Audiences to our work

• Expectations made explicit
• Better coherence of degree
• Student/parent better understanding of progress
  through course and towards degree
• A baccalaureate degree represents both a broad
  liberal education and specialized learning

31
Accomplishments of QUE

• Intentionality of curriculum
• Importance of systematic alignment among
  learning outcomes, assignments, assessments, and
  program
• Value of expanded community of judgment
• Set standards that provide common referent point
  for evaluating student work beyond limits of
  grades

32
Quality in Undergraduate Education QUE
Http//www.gsu.edu/que
Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University Byron
Brown Valdosta State University Jackie Thornberry
Georgia Perimeter College Dee Abrahamse
California State University Long Beach