Upload
trinhthien
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Building Bridges:
Implementing and Integrating QEP Assessments on Your Campus
IL YOUNG BARROWUniversity of Louisville
2016 Assessment Institute in Indianapolis
18 October 2016
1
2
Outcomes
• To identify ways to communicate and
engage your campus community from
both a top-down and bottom-up
approach in implementing change at
their institution;
• To apply our lessons learned to
address similar challenges at their
institution;
• To relate to the various stakeholders in
creating an authentic path to
integrating meaningful change on your
campus.Image taken from https://dnewmanpaintings.wordpress.com
3
Session Overview
• Our Quality Enhancement Plan
(QEP): What is it?
• The issues at hand
• Assessment of QEP and
student learning: A tale of 2
Stories
• Lessons Learned
• Q&A
4
A Prologue
• Education as a way
of gaining
knowledge
• Knowledge as Truth
• Truth as correct
• The Specter of the
Cave
• Mission: Kentucky’s premier, nationally
recognized metropolitan research
university
• Located: Louisville, KY
• Total Enrollment: 22,367 (Fall 2015)
• Academic Colleges & Schools: 13
• Degree programs: 200+
• 2010-2011 Degrees Awarded: 4,938
• # of Faculty: 2,403
• # of Staff: 4,595
Data provided by Institutional Research and Planning
About the University of Louisville
5
6
What is the Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)?
QEP Timeline at UofL
• Implemented: Fall 2007
• Interim Impact Report: March 2013
• Integration with full report: 2017
Two Integrated Outcomes
1. Students will be able to think critically
2. Students will develop the ability to
address community issues
7
UofL’s QEP: Ideas to Action (i2a)
8
Culminating Undergraduate
Experiences
(CUE)
Discipline-specific CT in
the majors
Critical Thinking (CT)
skills in Gen Ed
Common language, explicit reference to critical thinking skills
Our goals across the undergraduate curricula
9
Student
Affairs
Career
Services
Campus
Health
Services
First Year
Initiatives
Undergraduate
Academic
Advising
REACH
Civic
Engagement,
Leadership
and Service
Cultural
Center
10
Issues at hand
• Task with developing, implementing, and
integrating a Quality Enhancement Plan
• “Political Anarchy” (Siloed)
• Stay focused on the outcomes
• Supplementation versus Supplantation
• Demystifying Assessment
• Multi-pronged approach
• Take a snapshot from the institutional POV
• Identify the easiest point of entry
• Laying the foundation for bottom-up plan
• Provide faculty and programs with development
opportunities and incentives• Enhance faculty development opportunities
• Faculty Learning Communities
• Institutes and Guest Speakers
• Implementation and innovation grants
• Build and maintain ongoing relationships
11
Phase I: Needs Assessment and Backward Design
12
National
Surveys
General
Education
Quality
Measurement
System
Student
Opinion Survey
Annual
Student
Learning
Outcomes
(SLO)
Reports
Course
Artifacts
(e.g. syllabus,
assignments,
rubrics)
Unit-based
Initiatives
Pieces we started with at UofL (2007)
13
Paul Elder
Framework CAAP
Critical
Thinking
Critical
Thinking
ToolsCUEi2a
Assessment
Plan
Environmental
Enhancements
What was missing to make i2a work?
14
Putting the pieces together
“The general education
program at the University of
Louisville fosters active
learning by asking students to:
1. think critically,
2. communicate effectively,
3. understand and
appreciate cultural
diversity.”
15
What is the role of General Education in i2a?
Rubrics
• Critical Thinking
• Mathematics (Critical
Thinking)
• Natural Science (Critical
Thinking)
• Cultural Diversity
• Effective Communication
General Education Website:
http://louisville.edu/provost/ger/
16
How do we assess our students’ progress?
17
(CT1) Claim: States thesis; Identifies purpose; Demonstrates recognition of problem or question
(CT2) Evidence: Uses evidence, information, data, observations, experiences, and/or reasons
(CT3) Inference: Makes a logical argument; Develops a line of reasoning based on evidence
*(CT4) Point of View: Identifies and evaluates multiple points of view (different cultural values, a different
theoretical framework, or a different methodology)
(CT4) Influence of Context and Assumptions
(CT5) Implications: Evaluates implications, conclusions, and consequences
* CT4 was modified in 2013 with feedback from the General Education Curriculum Committee (GECC) and Assessment
Subcommittee. The rubric now more closely aligns with the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U)
VALUE Rubric for Critical Thinking.
2.70
2.46
2.66
2.08 2.06
2.28
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
CT1 CT2 CT3 *CT4 CT4 CT5
Mean
CT1
CT2
CT3
*CT4
CT4
CT5
What have we learned?
18
• Direct measure
• Collegiate Assessment of Academic
Proficiency (CAAP) Critical Thinking
Test
• Indirect Measure
• National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE)
CAAP Critical
Thinking
National
Surveys
(NSSE)
Unpacking two measures
19
CAAP Critical Thinking @ UofL
20
NSSE
21
• Developed together and embedded at
the program, unit, and institutional
level
• Defining Features
•Mastery, reflection, integration
•Authentic issues
• CUE self-reflections and evaluations
• Applied Critical Thinking Rubric
• 100% CUE
Culminating Undergraduate Experience (CUE)
2014-2016 i2a Assessment Plan
22
Annual
SLO
Reports
i2a
Assessment
Plan
Revisit the Annual Student
Learning Outcomes report
Aligning our practices
Phase II: 2014-16 i2a Assessment Plan
• Builds on foundational i2a work to date
• Measures critical thinking and CUE
integration for undergraduate programs
• Required university-wide data
collection
• Unit-defined plan for each semester
• Provides feedback to units/academic
programs
• Prepares us for 2017 reaccreditation
process
23
24
What is your story?
25
• Communicate and collaborate closely with the i2a team as we
engage in the 2014-16 i2a Assessment Plan.
• Maintain consistent and ongoing communication with your faculty
about the importance of participating in this effort.
• Consider how your programs will sustain these efforts related to i2a
beyond the 2014-16 assessment plan and what resources/support you
need from the i2a team.
• Continue to provide the i2a team with ongoing feedback on our
processes and reporting efforts.
• Work with your i2a unit leadership team and faculty facilitator to keep
communication lines open.
Your role in the i2a Assessment process
26
i2a Feedback
27
Critical Thinking Inventories
28
Institutional Lessons Learned
• Start small, do it well, then expand
• Set goals, be honest, encourage, and support
• You will change the landscape, expect the same
• Balance common goals with autonomy and unit-specific needs
• You have allies
29
Big Picture Takeaway
Thank you.
IL YOUNG BARROWQEP Specialist for Assessment
i2a/QEP Team
Delphi Center for Teaching & Learning
University of Louisville
Ph. 502-852-5105
Email. [email protected]
30