1. Using AAC&U’s Learning Tools to Address Core Revision Terrel L. Rhodes Vice President Association of American Colleges and Universities Texas Coordinating Board January 2014

2. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board – Core Objectives Critical Thinking Skills - to include creative thinking, innovation, inquiry, and analysis, evaluation and synthesis of information Communication Skills - to include effective development, interpretation and expression of ideas through written, oral and visual communication Empirical and Quantitative Skills - to include the manipulation and analysis of numerical data or observable facts resulting in informed conclusions Teamwork - to include the ability to consider different points of view and to work effectively with others to support a shared purpose or goal Personal Responsibility - to include the ability to connect choices, actions and consequences to ethical decision-making Social Responsibility - to include intercultural competence, knowledge of civic responsibility, and the ability to engage effectively in regional, national, and global communities

3. VALUE Project http://www.aacu.org/programs/VALUE

4. An obvious place to begin Help Students Understand What They Are Expected to Accomplish

5. LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes and Rubrics Inquiry and analysis Critical thinking Creative thinking Written communication Oral communication Quantitative literacy Information literacy Reading Teamwork Problem solving Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global Intercultural knowledge and competence Ethical reasoning and action Foundations and skills for lifelong learning Integrative learning Global Learning

6. From Creation to Capture: How to gauge impact VALUE Project (www.aacu.org/value) 16 national rubrics Created to: Develop shared understanding of common learning outcomes Improve direct assessment of student learning (in text and non-text formats) Encourage transparency and student self-evaluation of learning Rubric Development & Use  National Advisory Panel (12 people)  16 Inter-disc/Inter-institutional teams of faculty/scholars (Over 100)  Reviewed existing rubrics to develop broad agreement on dimensions of outcomes (openedpractices.org)  Tested in 2-4 waves on over 100 campuses  National reliability study  To date accessed by over 4000 institutions/organizations, 24,000 individuals  Domestic & international, K-12, state university systems  4 Consortia: RAILS, Connect2Learning, FIPSE Integrative Learning ePortfolio, South Metropolitan Higher Education Consortium  Approved for use in Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA)

8. Criteria The Anatomy of a VALUE Rubric Levels Performance Descriptors

9. National Reliability Study 40 Faculty 4 Traditional Disciplinary Divisions – Humanities, Social Sciences, STEM, Professions Three VALUE rubrics – Critical Thinking, Civic Engagement, Integrative Learning Common set of student portfolio work Agreement =.66 without norming;.8 normed

10. Types of Assessment VALUE Rubrics & Assessment

11. The Power of Rubrics and E-Portfolios as Tools for Both Assessment and High-Impact Learning Rubrics to help guide students and faculty Places individual faculty judgment within national shared experience; national benchmarks Can build up from course level to institutional reporting needs AND down from general to specific program/course context Designed to gather students’ best work, encourage self- assessment, and allow for mining of samples for assessment purposes Are portable, allow for cumulative learning and assessment, can complement other high-impact practices

12. Campuses Use VALUE Rubrics Most using for General Education Institutional Learning Outcomes Consortia/Collaboratives Clemson Use for Graduation Requirement

14. Building the Evidentiary Base University of North Carolina - Wilmington Dimension % of Work Products Scored 2 or higher % of Work Products Scored 3 or Higher IL1 Determine Information Needed 87.2%46.2% IL2 Access Needed Information 89.6%46.8% IL3 Evaluate Information and Sources 88.5%39.7% IL4 Use Information Effectively 85.9%43.6% IL5 Access and Use Information Ethically 93.6%59.0% Table 1. Information Literacy Results Table 1 Information Literacy Results Inter-rater reliability = >.8

15. Building the Evidentiary Base Percent of Ratings “VALUE added” for 4 years – writing – Univ. of Kansas

17. Building the Evidentiary Base University of Kansas – “analysis of the data from the AACU VALUE rubrics affirmed that a team approach to course design can yield larger improvement in some forms of student writing and thinking” “We also saw that the rubrics work best when there is close alignment between the nature of the assignment and the dimensions of intellectual skill described in the rubric” “Finally, at a practical level we are very encouraged that this process is manageable and sustainable”

18. Commonalities among rubrics Motivated by: Need for among-campus communication Mobile students, transfer Belief that, in spite of uniqueness, core outcomes are shared

19. Contact Terrel L Rhodes, AAC&U Vice President rhodes@aacu.org http://www.aacu.org/value