MT ENGAGE Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment April 27, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ability-Based Education at Alverno College. Proposed Outcomes for Session 1. To introduce you to Alvernos approach to designing integrative general education.
Advertisements

Outcomes Assessment. Many academic institutions measure the success of service- learning based on participation, number of hours, or estimated monies.
GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT Nathan Lindsay January 22-23,
Indiana State University Assessment of General Education Objectives Using Indicators From National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
Working with Rubrics: Using the Oral Communication, Writing, and Critical Thinking Rubrics VALUE Rubrics Ashley Finley, Ph.D Senior Director of Assessment.
Measuring the Impact of Service-Learning on Student Retention and Civic Skills Matthew Roy, Ph.D. Assistant Vice Chancellor for Civic Engagement University.
OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT Developing and Implementing an Effective Plan.
Assessment in the Biology Department in AY Caroline Solomon Friday December 5.
Measuring Student Learning March 10, 2015 Cathy Sanders Director of Assessment.
Assessment Consultant to THECB’s Undergraduate Education Advisory Committee (UEAC): Danita McAnally, Chief of Planning and Advancement.
4/16/07 Assessment of the Core – Social Inquiry Charlyne L. Walker Director of Educational Research and Evaluation, Arts and Sciences.
Graduate Program Assessment Report. University of Central Florida Mission Communication M.A. Program is dedicated to serving its students, faculty, the.
Educational Outcomes: The Role of Competencies and The Importance of Assessment.
University of Minnesota Duluth Design and Implementation of a Comprehensive Campus Assessment System Jackie.
Dallas Baptist University College of Education Graduate Programs
University Plan for the Assessment of Student Learning Spring 2006 Revisions Include: -Addition of Graduate School Learning Goals -Incorporation of recommendations.
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT PLANNING Presentation to CLAS Unit Heads Nov. 16, 2005 Maria Cimitile Julie Guevara Carol Griffin.
Curriculum, Instruction, & Assessment
PPA Advisory Board Meeting, May 12, 2006 Assessment Summary.
Weber State University Teacher Preparation Program Levels, Field Experiences, and Assessments.
Lindsey Wilson College October, In 2010, the LWC faculty adopted new institutional student learning outcomes including: Lindsey Wilson students.
May 18, Two Goals 1. Become knowledgeable about the QEP. 2. Consider your role in making the QEP a success.
The Personal Development Plan (PDP)
1 Student Success Plans Regional Meeting February 9, 2007 Youngstown State University Office of Assessment Sharon Stringer
Learning Outcomes and Assessment APCC Peter Wolf April
Essential Elements of a Workable Assessment Plan Pat Tinsley McGill, Ph.D. Professor, Strategic Management College of Business Faculty Lead, Assessment.
Measuring Dispositions Dr. Sallie Averitt Miller, Associate Dean Office for Assessment and Accreditation Columbus State University GaPSC Regional Assessment.
Universal Design for Learning in the College Classroom Abstract This Faculty Learning Community (FLC) integrated components of Universal Design for Learning.
Eportfolio: Tool for Student Career Development and Institutional Assessment Sally L. Fortenberry, Ph.D., and Karol Blaylock, Ph.D. Eportfolio: Tool for.
University College: Assessment, Planning and Outcomes
Pierce College CSUN-Pierce Paths Project Outcomes Report 2013.
Using Electronic Portfolios to Assess Learning at IUPUI. Trudy Banta, et. al. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis 2007.
FACILITATING AND DOCUMENTING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES Chantal Levesque-Bristol Associate Professor of Psychology Director, Faculty Center for Teaching.
General Education Assessment Report. Outcomes B-2, B-3, B-8, C-1, C-4, C-5  Methodology: The assessment for each of these outcomes used the Measure of.
First Tuesday Series February 2, SACS -- Quality Enhancement Plan SACS requires that universities develop a comprehensive plan to enhance student.
. Reaffirmation 2014Off-site review is completedOn-site review is February 2014QEP is ready to be submitted in January 2014.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
ESU’s NSSE 2013 Overview Joann Stryker Office of Institutional Research and Assessment University Senate, March 2014.
Presenting Evidence to meet the Graduating Teacher Standards at the conclusion of Edprac 608 The use of MyPortfolio.
EDU 385 CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT Week 1 Introduction and Syllabus.
WCU ’ s SACS QEP Quality Enhancement Plan The HIA Experience Irene Mueller, EdD, RHIA Mary Teslow, MLIS, RHIA College of Health & Human Sciences August.
Assessing Your Assessments: The Authentic Assessment Challenge Dr. Diane King Director, Curriculum Development School of Computer & Engineering Technologies.
Connecting Course Goals, Assignments, and Assessment Faculty Development for Student Success at Prince George’s Community College William Peirce
October 15, 2015 QEP: PAST AND PRESENT AND FUTURE.
What Your Program Needs to Know about Learning Outcomes Assessment at UGA.
Accreditation Update and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes Deborah Moeckel, SUNY Assistant Provost SCoA Drive in Workshops Fall 2015
Teaching Business: BADM Major Requirements Six Foundational Courses BADM 101 Introduction to Business BADM 110 Foundations of Management BADM 226 Organizational.
QCC General Education Assessment Task Force March 21 and 22, 2016 Faculty Forum on General Education Outcomes.
Orientation Meeting Humanities Distribution- Cycle B Fall 2012.
MUS Outcomes Assessment Workshop University-wide Program-level Writing Assessment at The University of Montana Beverly Ann Chin Chair, Writing Committee.
CAEP STANDARD 1: TEACHERS KNOW THEIR CONTENT AND TEACH EFFECTIVELY STANDARD 1 COMMITTEE.
Weston High School Improvement Plan 21st Century Learning Expectations and Goals
Quantitative Literacy Across the Curriculum. Members of the QLAC Committee Beimnet Teclezghi – co-chair Laura Pannaman – co-chair Marilyn Ettinger John.
Making an Excellent School More Excellent: Weston High School’s 21st Century Learning Expectations and Goals
PDP Presentation Trinity Washington University
CRITICAL CORE: Straight Talk.
Consider Your Audience
Developing a Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan and Report
Student Learning Outcomes and Rubrics
Information Literacy Standards for Freshmen Seminars
Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) Assessment Process
THE JOURNEY TO BECOMING
Derek Herrmann & Ryan Smith University Assessment Services
General Studies ePortfolio Pilot
Curriculum Coordinator: D. Para Date of Presentation: Jan. 20, 2017
Applied Psychology Program School of Business and Liberal Arts Fall 2016 Assessment Report
Quality Enhancement Plan
Curriculum Coordinator: Pamela Quinn Date of Presentation: 1/19/18
Curriculum Coordinator: Patrick LaPierre February 3, 2017
General Studies ePortfolio Pilot
Presentation transcript:

MT ENGAGE Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment April 27, 2015

SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS Michelle Boyer- Pennington PsychologyChair Carol SwayzeEXL DirectorCo-Chair Terry GoodinWomack Educational Leadership Tim GraeffManagement & Marketing Sheila OttoEnglish; General Education; LTITC Chris BrewerInstitutional Effectiveness Kari NeelyForeign Languages Martha WellerPhysics & Astronomy Michael HeinPsychology Newtona JohnsonEnglish; Gender Studies Kallie RevelsI/O Psychology Graduate Student

SUBCOMMITTEE OBJECTIVES  To develop student learning outcomes and program goals  To develop an assessment plan for measuring student learning outcomes and program goals

OUR PLAN OF ACTION  Fall 2014:  met as a group every 2 weeks to identify possible student learning outcomes and program goals using the QEP concept paper as a guide; developed 3 student learning outcomes and 3 program goals  Spring 2015:  1 st half : divided into three groups to develop rubrics and surveys to assess the three proposed student learning outcomes  2 nd half : divided into three groups to identify questions and data that could be used to assess the three proposed program goals

PROPOSED STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES & ASSESSMENT

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 1  Integrative/Reflective Thinking: Students will use integrative thinking and reflection to demonstrate the ability to make connections across multiple academic contexts and educational experiences.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 1: WHAT WILL BE ASSESSED (ADAPTED FROM AACU)  Students will demonstrate the ability to connect relevant experiences and academic knowledge. (connections to experience)  Students will demonstrate the ability to make connections across disciplines, perspectives. (connections to discipline)  Students will adapt and apply skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation to new situations. (transfer)  Students will use appropriate and various forms of communication to enhance the quality of their assignments. (integrated communication)  Students will demonstrate a developing sense of self as a learner, building on prior experiences to respond to new and challenging contexts. (reflection and self- assessment)

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 1 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT  An adapted version of the VALUE Integrative/Reflective Thinking rubric (AACU) will be used by faculty teaching MT Engage courses to assess aspects of integrative and reflective thinking that are specific to a course (for scoring course artifacts that will go in the e-portfolio) (see 5 competencies on slide 7).  The Scale of Reflection-in-Learning (adapted from Sobral, 2000) will be used as a program pretest and posttest to assess change in integrative and reflective thinking over time; this scale will be administered to the same students at least 3 times: (1) Fall 2016 (at the beginning of the program), (2) Spring 2018 (after 4 semesters/at the 2-year point), and (3) Spring 2020 (after 4 years/at graduation). pretest  Items on the End of Course Survey (8 items): administered at the end of each semester with student evaluations.End of Course Survey  Items on the End of Program Survey (8 items): administered at the end of 2 years (Spring 2018) and 4 years (Spring 2020).End of Program Survey

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 2  Personal and Professional Development: Students will demonstrate an understanding of, and the ability to reflect on, the self, such as identifying their aptitudes, abilities, strengths and weaknesses, and interests and articulating their future goals, aspirations, and place in the world.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 2: WHAT WILL BE MEASURED (ADAPTED FROM AACU)  Academic and Professional Goal Setting  Social and Interpersonal Development  Personal Identity  Civic Engagement and Awareness  Ethical Reasoning and Behavior

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 2 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT  Items on the End of Course survey (2 items): administered at the end of each semester with course evaluationsEnd of Course survey (  An adapted version of the VALUE Personal and Professional Development rubric (AACU) will be used to assess parts of the eportfolio, as well as activities that are specific to a course (course-specific artifacts).  Items on the End of Program Survey (19 items): administered after 2 years (Spring 2018) and 4 years (Spring 2020).End of Program Survey

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 3  Effective Communication: Students will be able to effectively, precisely, and appropriately communicate.  Elements of effective communication include  Structure/organization/clarity  Mechanics/technique  Content (+the use of evidence and appropriate supporting materials)  Delivery/style/presentation  Goal attainment & purpose (student’s understanding of and ability to convey)

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME 3 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT  Items on the End of Program Survey (12 items): administered at the end of 2 years (Spring 2018) and 4 years (Spring 2020).End of Program Survey  Items on the End of Course Survey: administered at the end of each semester as part of course evaluations (6 items).End of Course Survey:  An adapted version of the VALUE Oral Communication and Written Communication rubrics (AACU) will be used to assess course activities and the eportfolio.

OTHER PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES  Year 1: Semester 1 (Fall 2016)  A pre-program /beginning of program survey will be administered to all new freshmen at the beginning of the fall semester. Questions assess new students’ beliefs and attitudes about knowledge, skills, and abilities addressed in the QEP.pre-program /beginning of program survey  An adapted version of the NSSE (MTSU-SSE) will administered to all new freshmen at the beginning of the fall semester. Questions assess students’ prior experience with different learning activities.MTSU-SSE

OTHER PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (CONT’D)  Year 2: Semester 2 (Spring 2018)  Eportfolios will be collected from students who have completed 4 MT ENGAGE courses and graded using the e-portfolio rubric (to be developed) and rubrics for each of the three student learning outcomes  The MTSU-SSE will be re-administered.

PROPOSED PROGRAM GOALS

PROGRAM GOAL 1  Foster a culture of engaged learning and integrative thinking. This will be accomplished through the infusing of high impact educational practices across the curriculum.

PROPOSED PROGRAM GOAL 1 ASSESSMENT:  Possible Direct Measures:  # of faculty participating in MT Engage workshops, seminars, & learning communities;  # of students enrolled in MT Engage courses (annual enrollment);  # of students submitting MT Engage e-portfolios at the 2-year mark (Spring 2018);  # of students graduating from the MT Engage program;  # of colleges participating or offering MT Engage courses;  # of departments offering MT Engage upper division courses;  # of departments offering MT Engage lower division courses;  # of majors or programs offering upper division coursework in the MT Engage program;  # of classes approved as MT Engage courses;  # of sections of MT Engage courses offered;  # of different faculty offering MT Engage approved courses;  # of new MT Engage courses offered annually

PROPOSED PROGRAM GOAL 1 ASSESSMENT (CONTINUED):  Other Direct Measures:  Items on the MTSU-SSE (comparison of MT Engage students’ responses to non MT Engage students’ responses)  Faculty Survey questions (yet to be developed)

PROGRAM GOAL 2  Enhance student satisfaction with their learning, personal development, and professional development: Students who participate in MT Engage will report greater satisfaction with their learning, personal development, and professional development.

PROPOSED PROGRAM GOAL 2 ASSESSMENT:  Items on the End of Program Survey (5 items)End of Program Survey  Items on the MTSU-SSE (pre-program v. post program; MT Engage Scholars v. non MT Engage Scholars)  Sections of the eportfolio (responses to question prompts; reflection section on personal and professional development– an eportfolio rubric yet to be developed)

PROGRAM GOAL 3  Improve student retention, progression, & graduation: Students who participate in MT Engage will be retained, progress, and graduate at higher rates than students who do not participate in MT Engage.

PROPOSED PROGRAM GOAL 3 ASSESSMENT:  Students who enroll in an MT Engage course their first semester will be more likely to pass that course than students who enrolled in the same course that is not an MT Engage course (compare DWF rates of students ).  Students who enroll in MT Engage courses as freshmen (2 courses) will be more likely to return to MTSU for their sophomore year. (compare fall to fall retention rates of students)  Students who enrolled in MT Engage courses (4 courses the first two years) will be more likely to graduate than nonparticipants (compare 4-year and 6-year graduation rates of MT Engage students to non MT Engage students/ university rate as a whole).

PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TIMELINE Year 1:  Semester 1: Fall 2016  Beginning:  The Scale of Reflection in Learning —(all students w/student identification information)  Beginning-of-program survey (all students w/student identification information)  MTSU-SSE (select questions)—(all students w/student identification information)  End:  End-of- course survey (administered in MT Engage courses as part of course evaluations)  Semester 2: Spring 2017  End:  End-of- course survey (administered in MT Engage courses as part of course evaluations)

PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TIMELINE (CONT’D) Year 2:  Semester 1: Fall 2017  End:  End-of-course survey (administered in MT Engage courses as part of course evaluations)  Semester 2: Spring 2018  End: (for the pilot group, this would be end of program)  End-of-course survey (administered in MT Engage courses as part of course evaluations)  The Scale of Reflection in Learning (all students w/student identification information)  Pilot e-portfolio rubric (students with 4 MT Engage courses)  Pilot end-of-program survey (all students w/student identification information)  MTSU-SSE (select questions)—post program (all students with student identification information)

PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TIMELINE (CONT’D) Year 3:  Semester 1: Fall 2018  End:  End of course survey  Semester 2: Spring 2019  End  End of course survey

PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TIMELINE (CONT’D) Year 4:  Semester 1: Fall 2019  End:  End of course survey  Semester 2: Spring 2020 (After full integration, this would be end of program)  End  End of course survey  The Scale of Reflection in Learning (all students w/student identification information)  Post program survey  Eportfolio (graded with rubrics)  MTSU-SSE (graduating senior questions)—(all students with student identification information)