Presentation on theme: "1 erion 3: One University’s Strategy Conquering Criterion 3: One University’s Strategy Mrs. Susan Carr Dr. Mark Hall Oral Roberts University Oklahoma Association."— Presentation transcript:
1 erion 3: One University’s Strategy Conquering Criterion 3: One University’s Strategy Mrs. Susan Carr Dr. Mark Hall Oral Roberts University Oklahoma Association for Institutional Research and Planning 2006 Spring Conference March 10, 2006
2 Oral Roberts University Self-Study Steering Committee ●Co-chairs of Committee 3: Learning & Teaching ●Responsible for Criterion 3 ■Gather evidence. ■Evaluate evidence. ■Write one section of the report.
3 Goals 1.Understand the underlying guidelines and principles for accreditation. 2.Understand the scope of Criterion Three. 3.Convert from descriptive to evaluative statements. 4.Interpret Criterion 3 in light of the Cross-Cutting Themes. 5.Organize the committee.
4 Goal 1 Understand the underlying guidelines and principles for accreditation.
5 Higher Learning Commission Criteria for Accreditation Criterion 1: Mission and Integrity Criterion 2: Preparing for the Future Criterion 3: Student Learning and Effective Teaching Criterion 4: Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge Criterion 5: Engagement and Service
7 What should we do? ●Be evaluative, not just descriptive. ■Ask, “So what?” about each piece of evidence. ■Present data, then analyze it. ■State the evidence in a declarative sentence. ORU is committed to facilitating the spiritual, mental, and social growth and physical well-being of its students.
8 What should we do? ●Emphasize honesty. ■Recognize areas of weakness as well as strengths. ●Emphasize our distinctive mission. ●Emphasize assessment. ●Emphasize improvement and growth.
9 What should we do? ●Avoid compliance thinking. ■How are we fulfilling the criteria? ■How have we grown since the last self-study? ■Are we excelling in any area? How do we know this? ■Are we falling short in any area? What are we going to do about it?
10 The Report: A Coherent Presentation of our University ●What story do we want to tell? ●How do we want to tell it? The Process (1) Self-reflection ■How do we know that we are who we say we are? ■How do we know that we are doing what we say we are doing?
11 The Report Writing Process (2) Priorities ■What is important to us? ■Rank areas in order of importance.
12 The Report Writing Process (3) Interpretation ■Are we focusing resources, money, and personnel in the areas of top priority? ■Are we planning for future growth in these areas?
13 The Report Writing Process (4) Evaluation ■In Area X we are doing what we intended to do. ■In Area Y we are not doing what we intended to do, so here is our action plan. Add to it. Change it. Discard it.
14 Goal 2 Understand the scope of Criterion Three.
15 Criterion 3 in Official Terms The organization provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission. The Handbook of Accreditation NCA Higher Learning Commission
16 Criterion 3 in Everyday Language ●Our university is a great place to learn, and we can prove it! ●We are fulfilling the first half of President Roberts’ statement to the students, "Here you will get your learning…and keep your burning!"
17 Core Component 3A Goals & Assessment ●Formal Language The organization's goals for student learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible. ●Everyday Language We are able to assess what our students learn because we know what we want them to learn. CC3B
18 Core Component 3A Evidence ●Do we know what we want our students to know? ●Do our students learn what we teach them? Can we prove it? ●Do we assess what our students learn in hundreds of thousands of ways? What are they? ●Are we accountable to the whole world by sharing what our assessments tell us?
19 Goal 3 Convert from descriptive to evaluative statements. Goal 4 Interpret Criterion 3 in light of the Cross-Cutting Themes.
20 Descriptive Evidence for CC 3A ●The university has 4 outcomes and 16 proficiencies and capacities. ●All departments have outcomes. ●ORU has an Assessment Catalog. ●We conduct program reviews. ●We have student ePortfolios.
21 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3A Each general education course addresses at least one of the 16 proficiencies and capacities. In order to see how effectively students are meeting these proficiencies, a wide variety of artifacts have been identified and rubrics developed. The results the assessments of each artifact are collected and the data is aggregated and disaggregated.
22 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3A The aggregated and disaggregated data is then analyzed according to demographic information to show patterns that demonstrate student success or failure in the attainment of university goals. The results will be used to implement curricular changes at multiple levels including teaching methodologies, program refinement, and curriculum mapping.
23 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3A Additional data will then be collected so that the effectiveness of these changes can be determined. When combined with other assessment results, high levels of student achievement are continually promoted. Learning-Focused Future-Oriented
24 ●Formal Language The organization values and supports effective teaching. ●Everyday Language Our university employees have access to professional development and resources so they can provide the best learning in the universe, and they have the freedom to use those resources so that students are successful. Core Component 3B Effective Teaching CC3CCC3A
25 Core Component 3B Evidence ●What are some examples of innovation? ●Do faculty members keep abreast of research on teaching and learning? Does the university support them in this? ●What professional opportunities and resources are available to employees to make them more effective?
26 Descriptive Evidence for CC 3B ●Many of the faculty and staff are 8 th Floor Lead & Master Trainers. and/or have taken Intel Teach-to-the-Future training and coupon classes there. ●We played a major role in launching The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning for Christians in Higher Education (SoTL-CHEd). ●Many of the faculty and staff have gone to the Leadership Development Institute and participate in the peer mentoring program.
27 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3B Faculty members from various disciplines within ORU were discussing the need for current research in learning and teaching aligned with Biblical principles and put into practice by Christians in higher education. This discussion led to the creation of a peer- reviewed, online periodical devoted to this cause. The journal committee invited other CCCU schools to join ORU in this endeavor.
28 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3B The widespread support that this project has received from faculty and administration from all schools within ORU and the inclusion of member institutions demonstrates that effective teaching leading to student learning is highly valued and supported. Learning-Focused Distinctive
29 ●Formal Language The organization creates effective learning environments. ●Everyday Language We fully support our students. We have student advisement, development, and services that help them be effective learners. We also continually look for ways to improve our instruction. Core Component 3C Learning Environments CC3DCC3B
30 Core Component 3C Evidence ●Do we use the results of our student assessments to change the curriculum? ●Do we regularly review our teaching strategies, advisement procedures, activities, processes, and technologies to see if they are actually enhancing student learning? ●What are examples that our university respects student diversity?
31 Descriptive Evidence for CC 3C ●Faculty now advise freshmen within the individual departments ●We host the annual Conference on Christianity, Culture, and Diversity in America. ●All freshmen take the Career Direct Assessment and are taught how to interpret the results. ●All students receive technology training that enables them to create and maintain their ePortfolio.
32 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3C Budget constraints led to the movement of freshmen advisement from a centralized location back into the individual departments. In addition to providing knowledgeable academic advise, departments embraced this opportunity by having receptions, hosting dinners, decorating the department space, and finding other ways to welcome their freshmen.
33 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3C Data should be collected to determine if these students feel more closely connected to their majors and instructors, thereby improving retention and more effectively inculcating departmental and university outcomes. Based on the data analysis, changes should be made within various departments to strengthen faculty-student and student-student relationships. Future-Oriented Connected
34 ●Formal Language The organization's learning resources support student learning and effective teaching. ●Everyday Language Our students have an amazing amount and variety of resources at their disposal. Core Component 3D Learning Resources CC3CNext
35 Core Component 3D Evidence ●What types of resources, funding, and technology are available to support student learning? ●How do we evaluate the effectiveness of these resources in promoting student learning? ●Do students know how to use the resources? What training and assistance do we give them?
36 Descriptive Evidence for CC 3D ●The library continually adds and updates resources such as databases, e-books, online journals. ●Our Honors Program provides cross- disciplinary courses taught by two or more co-operative instructors. ●We have many university and departmental computer labs. ●We have many departmental simulation and learning labs (nursing, engineering, biology, art, modern language, music,…) ●We offer interdisciplinary majors.
37 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3D With the launch of the Honors Program, several interdisciplinary courses have been developed such as Science and the Imagination, the History of Quantitative Thought, and Principles of Leadership. These courses are taught by a pair or team of instructors from various departments who work cooperatively to design, integrate, and deliver the instruction.
38 Evaluative Evidence for CC 3D This cross-pollination demonstrates to students how the seemingly different disciplines actually affect each other, and how principles learned in one can be applied in another. Course papers, presentations, research projects, and ePortfolio artifacts show that student awareness of knowledge as an interactive whole rather than as a collection of independent subjects is increasing. Connected Distinctive
39 Goal 5 Organize the committee.
40 Committee Members ●Committed workers ●From a variety of areas ■Faculty/Staff ■New/Long-term employees ■Graduate/Undergraduate faculty ●Core-Component Sub-committees ●We have 13 members. ■2 co-chair ■1 administrative advisor ■10 committed workers
41 Notebook – Cover
42 Notebook - Cover ●Member name ●Committee name & symbol ●Co-chair names ●North Central Association ●Higher Learning Committee ●Oral Roberts University ●Re-Accreditation Self-Study ●Years of the study
43 Member List
44 Member List ●Names ●Roles in the committee ●Departments ●Phone numbers ●E-mail addresses
45 Other Preliminary Pages
46 Other Preliminary Pages ●PowerPoint notes explaining purpose ●Committee Responsibilities ●Committee Member Responsibilities ●Symbol Key
47 Notebook Sections
48 Criteria Section
49 Criteria Section ●One-page summary ●The Handbook of Accreditation, Pages 3.1-1 through 3.1-6
50 Cross-Cutting Themes Section
51 Cross-Cutting Themes Section ●One-page summary ●The Handbook of Accreditation, Pages 3.3-1 through 3.1-5
52 Criterion 3 & Examples of Evidence Section
53 Criterion 3 & Examples of Evidence Section ●Statement of Criterion 3 in formal and everyday languages. ●The Handbook of Accreditation, Page 3.1-4
54 Criterion 3 & Examples of Evidence Section ●Core Component Sheets ■Statement of core component in formal and everyday languages. ■Examples of evidence in the form of questions ●The Handbook of Accreditation, Page 3.2-8 through 3.2-12 ●Criteria 3 results of deans and chairs accreditation workshop report from the prior summer
55 Appendix Section
56 Appendix Section ●Steering Committee members and areas ●Self-Study timeline ●ORU document list ●Websites ■NCA & HLC ■Example self-study reports
58 Other Procedures & Forms ●Committee Member Tasks ●Guidelines for Data Collection ●Evidence Evaluation Form
59 Committee Member Tasks ●Month 1 ■Understand committee’s purpose. ■Read the notebook. ■Brainstorm for questions & evidence. ●Month 2 ■Form core-component subcommittees. ■Brainstorm survey questions. ■Identify evidence from deans & chairs list and ORU documents list.
60 Committee Member Tasks ●Months 3-9 ■In sub-committees, identify more questions & evidence. ■Report on sub-committee meetings. ■Gather & evaluate evidence. ■Exchange ideas with Committee 4. ●Months 10 & 11 ■Review report section after co-chairs write it.
61 Guidelines for Data Collection
62 Guidelines for Data Collection ●Be polite and professional. ●Emphasize accreditation…this benefits them, their department, and the university. ●Emphasize the value of their contribution. ●Minimize frustration.
63 Evidence Evaluation Form
64 Evidence Evaluation Form ●Rank (check boxes) ●Key for rank (scale) ●Name or description (1 sentence or less) ●Core Component (check boxes) ●Support of core component (1 sentence) ●Evaluation (2 sentences) ●Evaluator name ●Date
65 Reference The Higher Learning Commission. (2003). The handbook of accreditation (3 rd ed.). Chicago, IL. Retrieved March 7, 2006, from http://www.ncahigherlearningcommis sion.org/index.php?option=com_cont ent&task=view&id=37&Itemid=116
66 Thank you! ●Mrs. Susan R. Carr ■email@example.com ●Dr. Mark Hall ■firstname.lastname@example.org