06/14/04 1

Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University

Byron Brown Valdosta State University

Jackie Thornberry Georgia Perimeter College

Dee Abrahamse California State University Long Beach

Quality in Undergraduate Quality in Undergraduate Education (QUE) Education (QUE)

Http://www.gsu.edu/queHttp://www.gsu.edu/que

06/14/04 2

QUE Framing QuestionsQUE Framing QuestionsWhat happens if we offer resources and

support for reform of the curriculum to arts and sciences faculty at public universities and two-year colleges—and 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

06/14/04 3

About QUEAbout 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

06/14/04 4

How does QUE define How does QUE define standards?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

06/14/04 5

Challenge of changing Challenge of changing systemssystems

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

06/14/04 6

Instructional Learning Instructional Learning paradigm paradigmparadigm paradigm

Series of individual courses

Coverage of material

Develop learning outcomes

Set standards Integrate experiences Define how to assess Develop pedagogy and

develop supports

06/14/04 7

Grades and seat-time vs. Grades and seat-time vs. learning outcomeslearning outcomes

Limitations of grading and sorting systemAssessment 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

06/14/04 8

Conceptual Framework of Conceptual Framework of QUEQUE

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.

06/14/04 9

Essential Learning

Math SciencesEnglishHistory

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

BIOLOGY

---------------------------------------

HISTORY

---------------------------------------

--------------------------------Foundation

to major

Introductory

core

Level 12

Social Sciences

English Math Sciences

QUE

Level 14

Level 16

06/14/04 10

Essential Learning

Math SciencesEnglishSocial

Sciences

---------------------------------------

Critical Thinking

-------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

CROSSCUTTI

NG

COMPETENCIES

BIOLOGY

-------------Writing-----------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

HISTORY

06/14/04 11

Conceptual Framework of Conceptual Framework of QUEQUE

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

06/14/04 12

Conceptual Framework of Conceptual Framework of QUEQUE

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?

06/14/04 13

Super-matrix or gap analysis 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?

06/14/04 14

Super-matrix or gap analysisSuper-matrix or gap analysis 

  Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Course 4 Course 5 Total

Outcome 1 1 4 4 0 4 13

Outcome 2 2 1 2 0 2 7

Outcome 3 1 2 0 2 0 5

06/14/04 15

Quality in Undergraduate (Humanities) Education

Designing Standards in the Humanities

Using Standards to . . .Reconfigure CurriculumTransform ClassroomsEmpower Students

06/14/04 16

Phase 1: DefiningPhase 1: Defining Standards Standards for Changefor Change

Stăn ́dərd (a):

“A flag, banner, or ensign . . . bearing heraldic devices distinctive of a person or corporation.”

Stăn ́dərd (b):

“An acknowledged measure of comparison for quantitative or qualitative value; a criterion.”

06/14/04 17

Phase 2: Using Standards to Phase 2: Using Standards to Reconfigure Our CurriculumReconfigure 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)

06/14/04 18

Phase 3: Implementing Phase 3: Implementing Standards-Based InstructionStandards-Based Instruction

•Challenging, Purposeful Assignments

•Explicit, Transparent Performance Standards

•Clear, (Student-Designed?) Scoring Rubrics

06/14/04 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)

06/14/04 20

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

Difference in cultureImportance of administrator involvementSustained attention to relationshipsCommon faculty concern for success of transfer

students

06/14/04 21

Discussion Topics - Discussion Topics - mathematicsmathematics

Course alignment for transferability

Tests, projects, handouts, portfolios

Textbook selection

End of course assessment

06/14/04 22

OutcomesOutcomes

Mathematical Modeling

College Algebra/Precalculus

Calculus Sequence

06/14/04 23

Embedding Assessments in Embedding Assessments in HistoryHistory

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

06/14/04 24

Level 14 standards in Level 14 standards in American and World History American and World History

(Salisbury)(Salisbury)

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

06/14/04 25

Gateway Courses: Historical Gateway Courses: Historical Methodology (CSULB)Methodology (CSULB)

Assessable competencies published to all students

Assignments agreed on among sectionsEnforced as prerequisite to further courses

in majorWork forms basis of portfolio

06/14/04 26

Portfolio Assignments (Begun Portfolio Assignments (Begun in Gateway) - CSULBin 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)

06/14/04 27

Portfolio (continued)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

06/14/04 28

Work in ProgressWork in Progress

Theory and Historiography course (gateway pt 2)

Aligning assignments in other courses (portfolio demonstrates shortages in rest of curriculum)

06/14/04 29

Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

Focus on sharing ideas about learning in the discipline, with others in the field

Quality of learning improves – brings other faculty in

It’s intensive, and committed faculty need support to do it

Institution needs to be clear about its value in reward system

06/14/04 30

Connecting Public Audiences Connecting Public Audiences to our workto 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

06/14/04 31

Accomplishments of QUEAccomplishments of QUEIntentionality 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

06/14/04 32

Ronald J. Henry Georgia State University

Byron Brown Valdosta State University

Jackie Thornberry Georgia Perimeter College

Dee Abrahamse California State University Long Beach

Quality in Undergraduate Quality in Undergraduate Education QUE Education QUE

Http://www.gsu.edu/queHttp://www.gsu.edu/que