|
Student Learning Outcomes Lake Tahoe Community College Fall Convocation Presentation September 13, 2006
Presented by Steve Fernald and Kurt Green
Introduction The first thing I’ve learned from this undertaking is that Student Learning Outcomes are here to stay, no matter what we think or feel about them. The following is my attempt to explain our responsibilities and tasks as faculty of Lake Tahoe Community College to the recent accrediting visit and the subsequent citations the college received. The intention of this document is to provide verification of faculty “progress in moving the institution forward in the area of establishing Student Learning Outcomes at the course and program level.” As a result of the visit, the Commission has asked for a Progress Report to be submitted by October 15, 2007 focusing on the “institution’s resolution of the recommendations and concerns” that I’m listing in this introduction. There will also be a follow up visit conducted by the Commission in the fall of 2007. Since Student Learning Outcomes were of great concern to the Commission, I think we can expect that they will focus much of their attention on our progress in addressing their concerns. I’ve added italics to some statements to help us focus on what we, as faculty, need to address.
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges Reaffirmation Report “Recommendation 1: In order for the college to achieve substantial compliance with Standard I, the college must begin developing and implementing student learning outcomes (SLOs) for all of its courses, programs, degrees, and certificates. The team recommends that the college adhere to the October 2005 Academic Senate Resolution that mandates responsibility for the development and oversight of SLOs to the Academic Senate for all instructional units of the campus. The team further recommends the college develop mechanisms for measuring student learning outcomes and demonstrate how it uses these findings to improve student learning. Recommendation 2: To obtain substantial compliance with Standard I, the visiting team recommends the institution revisit its established and published planning cycle and demonstrate the extent to which the planning process and cycle includes the establishment and measurement of SLOs and how these are linked to the mission statement, institutional research, planning, resource allocation and evaluation. Recommendation 3: In order for the institution to demonstrate substantial compliance with Standard II, it is recommended the college develop SLOs and a systematic process for the assessment of those SLOs, at the course and program level, and use the outcomes of that process in course and program improvement. Furthermore, it is recommended greater emphasis be placed upon documenting dialogue taking place in all the other aspects of the campus and making it more readily accessible to internal and external constituencies. Recommendation 4: To ensure substantial compliance with Standard II, it is recommended Student Services develop and implement SLOs for all its component units, assess those measures, analyze the data, link the process to planning and budgeting, and use the results for continuous program improvement. Recommendation 9: To achieve substantial compliance with Standard IV and to increase the effectiveness of the institution’s commitment to college wide dialogue and consultation, the team recommends that an institutional commitment be established to the development of Student Learning Outcomes from the course level to the institutional level. The team recommends that the administration, as part of the institution’s overall assessment of its own quality and effectiveness, provide the appropriate level of resources and support to accomplish this task in a timely manner.
The Commission notes with concern that Lake Tahoe Community College has made little progress in moving the institution forward in the area of establishing Student Learning Outcomes at the course and program levels. This concern is validated by the team’s observation of an almost complete absence of institutional activity to define learning outcomes and to develop authentic assessments of learning. Assessment also needs to become part of program review, planning, and resource allocation processes at LTCC.”
Barbara A. Beno, Ph.D. President, Accdrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges
Listed below are the accreditation standards that Barbara Beno references in her letter to the college if anyone is interested.
Accreditation Standards
Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness The institution demonstrates strong commitment to a mission that emphasizes achievement of student learning and to communicating the mission internally and externally. The institution uses analyses of quantitative and qualitative data in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, implementation, and re-evaluation to verify and improve the effectiveness by which the mission is accomplished.
Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services The institution offers high-quality instructional programs, student support services, and library and learning support services that facilitate and demonstrate the achievement of stated student learning outcomes. The institution provides an environment that supports learning, enhances student understanding and appreciation of diversity, and encourages personal and civic responsibility as well as intellectual, aesthetic, and personal development for all of its students.
Standard IV: Leadership and Governance The institution recognizes and utilizes the contributions of leadership throughout the organization for continuous improvement of the institution. Governance roles are designed to facilitate decisions that support student learning programs and services and improve institutional effectiveness, while acknowledging the designated responsibilities of the governing board and the chief administrator.
Our Tasks I see eight tasks before us, as a faculty, to complete within a “reasonable amount of time.” 1. Accept the responsibility of the oversight of SLOs for all instructional units of the campus including Student Services. (Recommendation 1 & 4) 2. Develop mechanisms for measuring SLOs outcomes on both the course and program level. (Recommendation 1) 3. Demonstrate the use of these findings to improve student learning. (Recommendation 1) 4. Demonstrate the extent to which the planning process and cycle includes the establishment and measurement of SLOs. (Recommendation 2 & 3) 5. Demonstrate how SLOs are linked to the Mission Statement, institutional research, planning, resource allocation and evaluation. (Recommendation 2) 6. Establish a systematic process for the assessment of SLOs. (Recommendation 3) 7. Establish a process of implementing the recommendations. (Recommendation 3) 8. Commit to the development of SLOs from the course level to the institutional level. (Recommendation 9) I’ve summarized some books and articles later in this document regarding the task, and for easy reference, I’ve listed the title of the article or book following the numerical sequence of the above tasks. 1. Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes at the Institutional Level, page 7; The Outcomes Primer, Part 1 Confronting Confusion, page 15 2. A Perspective on Good Practice in Community College Assessment, page 6; Assessment at the Program Level, page 10 3. The Role of Student Learning Outcomes in Accreditation Quality of Review, page 12 4. Implications of State Performance Indicators for Community College Assessment, page 11; Assessment at the Program Level, page 10 5. Learning Outcomes for the Twenty-First Century: Cultivating Student Success for College and the Knowledge Economy, page 14 6. Assessment at the Program Level, page 10 7. A Perspective on Good Practice in Community College Assessment, page 6 8. The Outcomes Primer, page 15
The New Direction Rather than revisit and repeat last year’s convocation’s presentation on SLOs, I feel we should address our specific concerns and needs. During the summer, I read and reviewed a number of publications, visited a number of web sites, and plan on attending an accreditation visit training on September 12. The following is a summary of two of the books I read. I think they offer direction and advice for us. I attempted objectivity, but I know I lapsed at times, so please excuse me.
Developing and Implementing Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes, Andrea Serban and Jack Friedlander
1. A Perspective on Good Practice in Community College Assessment, Trudy W. Banta, Karen E. Black, Susan Kahn, Julia E. Jackson
Observations and Reflections 1. University level faculty focus more on research and other priorities within the academy than on high-quality education for students (Massy,2003). 2. To gain our constituent’s support, we must gain their trust by emphasizing service, innovation, and flexibility in the education we provide. 3. Early attempts to assess student learning in community colleges (1990s) often relied on standardized instruments (ACT). Faculty at both the 2 and 4 year institutions found such instruments to be of limited value. 4. Faculties have begun to align assessment approaches with locally developed, campus-specific goals for student learning and accomplishment. 5. Butler Community College (Kansas) developed an ongoing, systematic assessment program for general education. a. Faculties develop their own course-based assignments designed to assess specific, desired outcomes such as critical thinking skills. b. Students complete the assignments and receive grades on them. c. During the following semester, samples of the student work are analyzed by interdisciplinary groups of faculty using a common scoring rubric. d. Findings are submitted to an assessment team that aggregates the data and reports institution-wide results. e. These data are discussed and further analyzed in departmental faculty meetings. f. During the third semester of the assessment cycle, the director of assessment and a faculty representative from the assessment team meet with faculty and administrators to review findings and discuss needed improvements in curriculum, planning, budgeting, or the assessment process. g. To begin the next cycle, the director of assessment identifies for each department the courses from which samples of student work will be drawn. h. Faculties then generate the assignments that will be assessed, and the process continues.
6. Characteristics of good practice in the three phases of assessment. a. Planning 1. Involves stakeholders from the outset to incorporate their needs and interests and solicit later support. 2. Begins where the need is recognized. 3. Has a written plan with clear purposes that are related to goals that people value. 4. Bases assessment approaches on clear, explicitly stated program objectives. b. Implementing 1. Has knowledgeable, effective leadership. 2. Recognizes that assessment is essential to learning. 3. Includes faculty and staff development to prepare individuals to implement assessment and use the findings. 4. Uses multiple measures. 5. Assesses process as well as outcomes. 6. Occurs in an environment that is receptive, supportive, and enabling. 7. Incorporates continuous communication with constituents concerning the activities and findings. c. Improving and Sustaining 1. Produces credible evidence of learning and organizational effectiveness. 2. Ensures that assessment data are used to improve programs and services. 3. Provides a vehicle for demonstrating accountability to stakeholders. 4. Encompasses the expectation that outcomes assessment will be ongoing, not episodic. 5. Incorporates ongoing evaluation and improvement of the assessment process itself.
2. Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes at the Institutional Level, Andreea M. Serban
“Assessment is the systematic collection, review, and use of information about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development” (Banta,1999).
“Student outcomes assessment is the act of assembling and analyzing both qualitative and quantitative teaching and learning outcomes evidence in order to examine their congruence with the institution’s stated purposes and educational objectives” (Volkwein,2003).
Observations and Reflections 1. Effective assessment begins with clear, overall institutional goals and values. 2. The following areas of educational activity have distinct importance for linking purposes, resources, and educational outcomes. a. Basic skills education b. General education c. Major d. Student’s personal and social development 3. Basic skills assessment needs to include exit proficiencies and tracking of student’s transition and performance in college-level courses. a. Include comparisons between performance in college-level courses of students who transitioned from basic skills verses students who did not need remedial education. b. Include non-cognitive factors of self-reported measures of attitude, satisfaction, and goal completion. c. Incorporate institutional interventions. 1. San Diego Community College District instituted mandatory enforcement of all course prerequisites. 2. Create collaborative partnerships between community colleges and feeder high schools. 3. Implement computer-aided instruction systems. 4. General education – “An essential aim [of general education] is to activate the verbal, numerical, and visual skills necessary to analyze and synthesize information, construct arguments, and identify and solve problems” (Banta,1999). The broad competencies that are the subject of assessment related to general education are: a. Cognitive abilities – critical thinking, problem solving. b. Content literacy – knowledge of social institutions, science, and technology. c. Literacy skills – communication, information skills. d. Value awareness – multicultural understanding, moral and ethical judgment. e. There are three different types of approaches to assessment of general education. 1. Individual course 2. Multi-course 3. Non-course f. Methods and instruments used for assessment of general education include: 1. Standardized tests 2. Self-reported measures of progress obtained through locally developed or published surveys, essays, class discussions, class exit assignments, course-embedded assessment activities, portfolios, and capstone courses. 3. Reviews of course syllabi. 4. Inventories of class assignments. 5. Common final exams.
5. Students’ personal and social development. a. Student services influence the personal and social development of students (Volkwein,2003). b. The assessment techniques most frequently used to assess this growth include: 1. Surveys 2. Interviews 3. Focus groups 6. Reporting and using assessment results a. In order to ensure the primary purpose of assessment (to improve teaching and learning), improvement can occur if adequate, timely, and systematic feedback is provided to all who are involved in assessment including faculty, administrators, and the community. b. Design the reports to be audience specific. c. Design reports for major areas (basic skills, general education, etc.) d. Link the reports to internal processes such as program review, planning, and budgeting. 7. Assessment expertise and skills a. One of the major challenges in building, sustaining, and effectively utilizing student learning outcomes assessment is having the expertise and skills on campus. 1. Vision – There must be a broad and comprehensive grasp of institutional goals and purposes with a clear view of how assessment processes and outcomes can be used to advance these goals and purposes. 2. Understanding of the college – There must be a clear conceptual understanding of how the college functions and the strengths and limitations of faculty and administrators as they perform their roles. 3. Functional knowledge – A thorough knowledge of measurement theory, statistical methods, and research design is needed. 4. Technical know-how – Should possess the practical knowledge of techniques of data collection and analysis. 5. Understanding of relevant concepts. 6. Good communication skills. 7. Academic qualifications. 8. Teamwork 3. Engaging Faculty and Students in Classroom Assessment of Learning, Fay Rouseff-Baker, Andrew Holm
Observations and Reflections 1. Engaging the faculty and students in authentic assessment of student learning at the classroom level through the use of CATS. 4. Assessment at the Program Level, Trudy H. Bers
Observations and Reflections 1. Programmatic assessment “helps determine whether students can integrate learning from individual courses into a content whole. It is interested in the cumulative effects of the educational process” (Palomba and Banta, 1999). 2. It focuses on the extent to which each student in the program acquires the knowledge, skills, beliefs, and feelings specified as program outcomes. 3. It focuses on gauging the learning of a group of students in the program rather than each student in it. 4. Assessing a group of students in a program is of more value to the department or institution as it can be used to improve courses, programs, and services. 5. Types of programs: a. A sequence of prescribed courses – nursing b. The general education component of an Associate Degree c. Courses in a specific discipline – psychology d. Precollegiate or remedial courses e. Special programs for selected students 6. Assessment approaches a. Capstone courses – for this, course learning outcomes can be interpreted as program level outcomes. b. Vendor or industry certification examination where there is external validation that the student has acquired the knowledge and skills identified by the vendor or organization as essential for a particular job or credential. c. Institutional or departmental testing that requires faculty to agree on one or more standardized or industrially developed tests that cover all or most essential elements of a program. These tests are administered to all students at the completion of the program. d. Satisfaction surveys that reflect student and alumni self-reported estimates of learning as indirect evidence of student learning outcomes. e. Portfolio assessment that contains documentation of learning and development across the spectrum of program objectives. f. Performance manuals that lists and briefly describes behaviors a student should be able to execute with competency at the conclusion of a program. Teachers evaluate students’ abilities to perform these behaviors, which may be observed in a class, at clinical settings, through service learning, or elsewhere. g. Narratives – Brenner (1999) suggests a novel approach to assessment: having students recount their experiences through stories while faculty assess learning by listening to and questioning students to determine whether they demonstrate understanding of the context and content of the situations they describe. h. Culminating project that must be broadly defined and reflect learning and ability to integrate information from across the curriculum. i. Transfer to and success in another institution as an indirect indicator of student learning by acceptance at and transfer to a four year college or university. 7. Challenges of implementation a. Defining programs. b. Identifying students who are at the end of a program. c. Faculty concurrence on key learning outcomes. d. Resources to implement some assessments. e. Sporadic or missing feedback on external certification or licensure examinations. f. Sustaining the assessment effort.
5. Implications of State Performance Indicators for Community College Assessment, Joseph C. Burke, Henrik P. Minassians
Observations and Reflections 1. The 1990s moved accountability for community colleges from outcomes assessment to performance reporting. 2. In theory, performance reporting asserted state priorities, adopted indicators assessing their achievement, and allowed comparisons among peer institutions. It pledged a shift from process and inputs to outputs and outcomes. 3. Leaders in both community colleges and four-year campuses have failed to develop robust indicators of student learning outcomes capable of competing with input and process measures of quality and of winning acceptance in the academic community and in state capitols. 4. Community colleges should have reporting indicators that reflect their distinct goals. 5. Since performance reporting programs become increasingly invisible on campuses below the level of vice president, a system of internal reporting from academic departments on a limited list of core indicators is needed to develop an unbroken chain of performance reporting.
6. The Role of Student Learning Outcomes in Accreditation Quality of Review, Barbara Beno
“In recent years, accreditation standards developed and used by most of the regional accreditors have changed to incorporate the assessment of student learning as a central process in evaluating institutional effectiveness.”
Observations and Reflections 1. Accountability refers to the public’s fundamental interest in what students are supposed to learn and how well they are learning. 2. Accreditation and student learning a. In assessing institutional quality, accreditors are evaluating the student learning produced by the institution in the context of the institution’s own mission, its stated learning objectives, and its identified means of assessing student learning. b. The college must identify the expected student learning outcomes in the context of our mission and our curriculum and develop means for assessing student learning. c. Institutional effectiveness requires institutional assessment and improvement strategies that ultimately support learning or result in improved student learning. d. Accreditors will require community colleges to collectively attribute meaning to the results of learning assessment and to plan institutional improvements that will result in learning. e. Accreditors will want to examine evidence that the institution is meaningfully engaged in assessing student learning, and they will want to see some evidence of student learning. f. Community colleges must demonstrate setting appropriate student learning goals for course, program, certificate, or degree offered. 1. These must conform with the college’s standards for quality. 2. They must be consistent with higher education standards of quality. 3. They must address the content and level of learning students are expected to achieve. 4. They must be in writing and communicated to faculty and students. 5. Evidence might include course syllabi, official course outlines, or other documentation. 6. There must be evidence of course and program goal alignment through recorded discussions, review, and revision. g. Colleges must collect evidence on how well students are learning. 1. Institutional strategies. 2. Faculty strategies (formative and summative). 3. Methodologies must be valid and reliable. 4. Keep records of experimental strategies. h. Document student achievement of expected learning goals of the institution. This includes results compiled by individual faculty, program, degree, or certificate. It could include learning portfolios. i. The institution will be evaluated based on its degree of engagement with the assessment of learning all the way to the level of the individual. 1. Demonstrate an institution-wide understanding of educational quality. 2. Demonstrate institution-wide commitment to improved learning. 3. Demonstrate ways assessment and interpretation have informed college planning. j. Mesa Community college’s example of seven areas of learning for its general education program: 1. Communication 2. Problem solving and critical thinking 3. Numeracy 4. Arts and humanities 5. Scientific inquiry 6. Information literacy 7. Cultural diversity In each of these areas, the college designed general education outcomes that are each measured with a different assessment tool. Students are assessed at the beginning of study and at the point of completion of general education. A faculty committee interprets results and develops themes of interdisciplinary faculty work and development over subsequent years to enhance curriculum and pedagogy in order to improve learning. k. Prompts for faculty evaluation of specific learning outcomes covered in their courses. 1. Is the outcome explicitly stated as an outcome for the course? 2. Are the students asked to demonstrate their competence through course work that is assessed by the instructor? 3. Do students receive formal feedback on their mastery of this learning outcome from the instructor? l. The time frame for full implementation is between 10 and 15 years.
7. Assessment of Online Education: Policies, Practices, and Recommendations, John Milam, Richard A Voorhees, Alice Bedard-Voorhees Observations and Reflections 1. There is relatively little empirical research to guide deep policy discussions about assessing online education. 2. If learning is different in an online environment, assessment and methodology should be different, too. 3. In fully online environments, multiple measures, formative and summative assessment over the course timeline, and electronic interaction with the learner are sound assessment practices. 4. Western Governors University has been a leader in the measurement of online learning. 5. Assessment tools: a. “Assessing Learners Online.” b. Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications c. Student satisfaction surveys and retention rates
8. Learning Outcomes for the Twenty-First Century: Cultivating Student Success for College and the Knowledge Economy, Cindy L. Miles, Cynthea Wilson
Observations and Reflections 1. Can students do what their degrees imply? 2. The adoption of “21st Century Skills.” a. Communication skills (reading, writing, speaking, listening) b. Computation skills (understanding and applying mathematical concepts and reasoning, analyzing and using numerical data) c. Community skills (citizenship; appreciation of diversity and pluralism; local, community, global, and environmental awareness) d. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills (analysis, synthesis, evaluation, decision making, creative thinking) e. Information management skills (collecting, analyzing, and organizing information from a variety of sources) f. Interpersonal skills (teamwork, relationship management, conflict resolution, workplace skills) g. Personal skills (ability to understand and manage self, management of change, learning to learn, personal responsibility, aesthetic responsiveness, wellness) h. Technology skills (computer literacy, Internet skills, retrieving and managing information via technology) 3. Implementation of all learning outcomes across the curriculum for all students is the goal. a. Implementation in discrete courses. b. Implementation in some programs or disciplines. c. Implementation across the curriculum.
The Implementation The Outcomes Primer Reconstructing the College Curriculum By Ruth Stiehl with Les Lewchuk
Part 1 Confronting Confusion Our biases about teaching and learning are deeply ingrained and are revealed in our course syllabi which mirror one of three basic frameworks: 1. A Content Framework which consists largely of topics to be covered, readings on the topics, term papers on the topics, and objective tests regarding the topics. 2. A Competency Framework which consists largely of miniscule tasks the student will have to demonstrate for a grade. Demonstration of competence, in often trivial and disconnected tasks, is a direct result of reform efforts in education from 1965-1985 when the framework was based on behavioral psychology. 3. A Learning-Centered Outcomes Framework which tells up front what the student will be able to DO (during the rest of life) with what s/he learns in the course. Students engage in meaningful tasks (projects) that require synthesis of understanding and skill development.
The Paradox of Educational Reform Learner control versus society control of learning is rooted in one of two basic social conflicts of a democracy: the freedom of the individual to grow and develop as a living system and the needs of society to predict and control for the benefit of all. The paradox is revealed in the apparent incompatibility of the mechanical and imposed needs of society and the individual needs, potential, and growth of the learner. “The strength of a learner-centered outcome-driven curriculum is that it is flexible enough to allow room for individual growth yet provide continuity and structure to guarantee that society’s need for competent workers and community citizens is met” Restructuring the college curriculum requires an understanding of this balance.
The Increasingly Complex Role of the College Instructor In the recent past, the changes in faculty role perception appear to be more rapid in community colleges than in four-year institutions. Traditionally, the best “expert” was hired to teach a specialized body of knowledge; in the 1980s and 1990s, these experts assumed an expanded expectation for “facilitating” student learning. The emerging view at the beginning of this century is to envision what our students should be able to do “out there” as a result of their work in the classroom.
Content-Centered Teaching The center of the higher education universe had been the content. “Learning is assumed to be linear and therefore content-centered teaching is a “fixed time with fixed expectations process.”
Learning-Centered Facilitation Facilitation, coaching, collaborative learning – are these just passing fads? Learning is about making cognitive connections and realizing that nothing exists in isolation.
Part 2 Thinking Outside the Classroom Box Envisioning Outcomes – Intended and Unintended “Learning means engaging in a task that builds personal capacity for the rest of life.” The question to ask is: “What do my students need to be able to DO ‘out there’ (in the rest of life) that we are responsible for in this classroom?” These are intended outcomes. Unintended outcomes can sometimes be more significant than the results the course is designed to provide. This is the balance between society’s need to protect educational standards and each student’s need to grow and develop as a unique person.
Creating Assessment Tasks “Once we have clearly stated outcomes for a course, assessment is merely finding appropriate ways for students to demonstrate their capability to meet those outcomes.” Assessment takes two forms: formative and summative. Formative assessment goes on continuously throughout the learning activities to see what progress is being made and to increase learning. Grading this work is not the intention. It is to observe and track how the student is progressing. Summative assessment is associated with each intended outcome and takes place when the learning experience is completed.
Defining Content: Analyzing What Students Need to Understand A major concern regarding outcomes-based education is that somehow subject content is lost. It isn’t lost, but it no longer comes first. Curriculum design isn’t just a process of deciding what content should be covered. It is a process of deciding what content students must understand and master in order to achieve intended outcomes. The focus is on “understanding” and “Skills.” What students need to understand is expressed in three ways: themes, concepts, and issues.
Defining Content: Analyzing What Skills Students Need Defining content is determining what set of skills the learner needs to master in order to demonstrate the intended outcome. Skills are distinguished from themes, concepts, and issues by how they are learned. They are taught and learned through demonstration, practice, feedback, and more practice. Themes, concepts, and issues are learned by exploring ideas and dialoguing about the meaning. There are skills that are raised to the level of institutional learning outcomes because they are the responsibility of all disciplines (critical thinking, writing, listening, analyzing, etc.) and need to show up in every curriculum plan. Outcomes involve interdisciplinary skills. The content of any course or academic program is described in terms of the skills to be developed and the themes, concepts, and issues to be understood.
Analyzing the Outcome to Determine the Content “Instead of setting out to design a course around the content we want to cover, we let the content emerge from a vision of what students need to be able to do beyond the classroom.” This is diametrically opposed to the “content first” culture of higher learning.”
Strategic Plan for Learning Experiences The necessity of planning curriculum backwards, from the outside in, leads to the curriculum becoming a strategic plan with a clear focus and careful alignment of appropriate learning experiences. This enables the students to see the relationship between the content they must learn, the assessment that will be conducted and the intended outcomes, which speak with meaning for their lives outside the classroom walls.
Part 3 Designing Backwards From the Outside In A Learning-Centered Outcomes-Based Curriculum Development Process The whole curriculum should be dependent upon the communities and places of work where our students will find themselves in the years to come. The world of the student can be divided into either the near or far environment. The near environment is the immediate future and can be more easily envisioned. The far environment includes making some projections regarding the future and the broad scope of life. This curriculum is attuned in every way to the world in which our students will live, and it follows six steps of development. 1. Envision the learner in “the rest of life” contexts 2. Envision what the learner is able to do as a result of this course or program 3. Determine what concepts and issues the learner will need to understand 4. Determine what skills the learner will need to possess 5. Determine what the learner can do to show proficiency in this course or program 6. Create standards for the assessment task
Significant Assessment Tasks Assessment tasks must be more than academic exercises – they must involve the kinds of complex tasks students are faced with in the rest of life. All through life we are solving problems, producing products, giving presentations, demonstrating procedures, creating documentation-like portfolios. Assessment tasks should be parallel to what students will do in life with what they have learned.
Redesign Course Outlines of Record 1. Work as teams a. Creating a flow b. Being brief c. Writing with clarity 2. Themes a. Every outcome statement has embedded into it two or three themes that come from the outcome statements, not from textbook titles
3. Concepts a. The development of concepts (personal meaning) brings depth to study and leads to connect this meaning to new experience b. Concepts elevate our thinking to a level of abstraction c. Concepts are typically represented by one or two words that have universal application and appear timeless 4. Issues a. Issues are the primary problems the student must understand in order to achieve the intended outcome 5. Skills a. Skills are what a student must be able to do and requires a routine of practice and feedback b. It must be a process they can master 6. Assessment Tasks a. Assessment tasks are what students are asked to do (projects, demonstrations, presentations) to show their understanding and their skill 7. Intended Outcomes a. Outcomes are clear statements of what students will be able to do outside the classroom with what they have learned b. These statements should be clear enough to be understood by anyone who has an interest in the course c. They must be complex enough to provide direction for the whole course d. Program outcomes are essential to writing good course level outcomes e. Create a program map to see the connections between the courses 8. Program Outcomes Guide a. Prerequisites – What must the student be able to do before engaging in this work? b. Courses – What learning experiences (courses) are necessary to prepare the student? c. Capstone Assessment Tasks – What can we have students do in this program to show final evidence of the intended outcomes? d. Intended Outcomes – What do students need to be able to DO “out there” for which this program will prepare them?
Part 4 Getting Your Feet Wet 1. Faculty Energy and Commitment a. There is evidence in three of the four studies cited that the dialogue inherent in outcomes-based curriculum planning renews faculty energy and commitment. b. There is evidence from at least two of the studies cited that outcomes-based curriculum planning increased collaboration and reduced competition between programs and campuses in a multiple campus institution. 2. Six Stages in Outcomes-Based Curriculum Reconstruction at the Course Level a. Immersion – Curriculum group is immersed in outcomes “thinking” without an intent of “training” them. b. Creation – Sub-groups take on constructing COGs (course outcome guides) for courses they are particularly interested in revising. c. Negotiation – Curriculum group reviews the draft COGs and negotiates changed. d. Rounds of Revision – Sub-groups make further revisions until the larger group accepts the COGs (the process of word-smithing). e. Submission – COGs are filed with the curriculum office and website. f. Implementation – Instructors use COGs as a basis for their planning and student syllabi. 3. The Outcomes Planning Process a. Traditional Content-Focused Planning Process 1. Outline the course content 2. Plan teaching strategies 3. Plan grading policies – tests 4. Course content outline b. Outcomes Planning Process 1. Identify what must be understood: themes, concepts, issues 2. Identify necessary skills 3. Create appropriate assessment tasks and tools 4. Identify intended learning outcomes
Resources and References Lake Tahoe Community College Mission Statement Our Mission Lake Tahoe Community College promotes learning and enrichment for our students and community through exemplary educational experiences provided in a uniquely supportive environment. Our Vision Lake Tahoe Community College will provide outstanding educational opportunities for every student in a personal learning community.
Guided by our commitment to learning, we will be known for our innovative instructional programs delivered in a student-oriented environment.
Academic excellence and strong community partnerships will afford our students the experiences necessary for their future. Our Beliefs We at Lake Tahoe Community College believe: · Students come first. · An educated citizenry is fundamental. · Learning enhances the quality of life. · Innovation, integrity, high standards and the pursuit of excellence are essential. · Diversity enriches. · We make a difference. Our Goals Lake Tahoe Community College exists to meet the post-high school educational needs of the citizens of its district. The college places the student at the center of its four primary goals: · To provide counseling, guidance and special assistance to individuals so that they may recognize and direct their special abilities, needs and interests. · To offer courses designed to satisfy the lower division requirements of four-year institutions. · To offer courses designed to provide direct employment in business, industry and public service agencies. · To offer classes, programs, and special services through which all persons in the community may broaden their educational and vocational potential and enhance their personal and cultural development.
In the Visionary Group Overview and History compiled by Nancy Barclay, there is a section that was presented at last year’s convocation (2005) that listed “the top five goals” faculty desired to have “students graduate with:” 1. a desire to learn, leading to lifelong learning; 2. an appreciation for diversity of opinions as well as cultural diversity 3. the ability to form ideas and informed opinions; 4. communication skills, and a sense of personal and community responsibility Getting to Work This is the goal of the workshop. For those of you who are working on your course or program outcomes online, please send me a copy of your recorded comments and results. A handout describing the day’s activities will be distributed at the workshop. |