Beth E. Barnett Scott E. Evenbeck

Sara B.Varhus

AAC&U General Education and Assessment 3.0: Next Level Practices Now

March 3, 2011 Chicago, Illinois

Pre-Conference Workshop 5

Contacts

Sara B. Varhus Vice President for Academic Affairs

Nazareth College 4245 East Avenue

Rochester, NY 14618 585-389-2010

svarhus0@naz.eduwww.naz.edu

Deans and other administrators are partners with faculty in the design, implementation, and assessment of general education; the articulation of learning outcomes; and the development of curricular and cocurricular connections. This workshop will use multi-institutional case studies to focus on the role deans and other administrators can play in fostering innovative practices and policies to enhance student learning. Participants willcontextualize approaches to their own campus contexts.

Contexts for Collaboration and Support of Student Learning:

The Roles of Deans and Administrators

Sponsored by the American Conference of Academic Deans

Presentation

Welcome and Introduction Ramapo Nazareth College New Community College The Role of Deans and Administrators Lessons Learned Discussion Resources

RAMAPO COLLEGE

Beth E. Barnett

Ramapo College Curricular Enhancement Project Move to a 4-credit-course curriculum (need to

redesign all program curricula) Redesign general education

Align with refreshed mission statement Incorporate suggestions from AAC&U – LEAP Provide foundational skills in the liberal arts Make additional use of the FT faculty

Teaching load adjustment

Ramapo College of New JerseyMission StatementRamapo College of New Jersey is a comprehensive

institution of higher education dedicated to the promotion of teaching and learning within a strong liberal arts based curriculum, thus earning the designation “New Jersey’s Public Liberal Arts College.” Organized into thematic learning communities, Ramapo College provides academic excellence through its interdisciplinary curriculum, international education, intercultural understanding and experiential learning opportunities.

Ramapo CollegeAll College Learning Goals Mission Pillars

Interdisciplinary Analysis Experiential Learning Intercultural/International Perspectives

Skills Critical Inquiry Communication

Knowledge In-Depth Knowledge (major) Understanding of the World in Which We Live

Values and Responsibilities Awareness Engagement

LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes

Structure of General Education at Ramapo CollegeRequired Courses First Year Seminar (100 level) College English (100 level) Social Issues (100 level) Readings in Humanities (200 level)Categories History (100 level) Mathematical Reasoning (100 level) Science with experiential component (100 level) Intercultural North America (200-300 level) International Issues (200-300 level) Topics: Arts and Humanities/Topics: Social Science (200-300 level) Major Capstone Course (400 level)

Challenges

Conflict between “Public Liberal Arts College” designation and mission classification as a comprehensive institution.

Focus on outcomes (student learning) vs. inputs (courses).

Projected staffing of courses. National model vs. home grown model. Time, leadership, and governance.

The Ramapo College Case

Scope of the Project.

Shared Governance.

Generalized concerns vs. unique concerns.

Take away …

NAZARETH COLLEGE

Sara B. Varhus

Core Revision from the Perspective of the VPAA

2013 Core

Reflects College Mission and Vision Incorporates national best practices Provides for connection between LAS and

Professional Study Connects academic learning to experience Is intentionally integrative

(Structure of Core)

Foundations

Perspectives/Enduring Questions

Integrative Studies

Reflective Portfolio

http://www.naz.edu/academic-affairs/documents/Approved.Master.doc.16Apr10.pdf

Can also be found on the Academic Affairs web page, under “For Faculty”

Challenges

Organization of higher education institutions

Faculty expertise and experience

Characteristics/history of the institution

The lens of Bolman and Deal

Role of VPAA

Inspire and educate

Attend to process

Adhere to a few broad goals

Open the purse

The Process: 2006-2013

Phase one: Mission and Vision, Strategic Plan, Discovery and Development, Model for discussion

Phase two: Reorganizing the process, Discovery and Development, Student Learning Outcomes approved Spring 2009

Core model approved, spring 2010

Implementation, 2010-2013

Studying the Nazareth Case

Credibility of the Process Faculty Leader Building Expertise Broad Input vs. Consensus Implementation as Program Development Comprehensive Reform vs. Incremental

Change

“Such is the nature of strategic thinking in the academic sphere. As a form of leadership, it moves through conflicts and disagreements to find the shared values and concepts to which people are willing to make commitments.”

Richard L. Morrill, Strategic Leadership

NEW COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Scott E. Evenbeck/Tracy Meade

New Community College Model Pre-College & Transition Engagement

New Community CollegeFirst-Year Program Required Full-time Enrollment in the First Year Learning Communities, Contextualize Skills Instruction,

Embedded Student Support, ePortfolio First-year Core Curriculum

City Seminar (NYC-based case-study curricula;12 hours/week) Statistics (6 hours/week); Ethnographies of Work (3 hours/week)

Curricular Links to Programs of Study Curricular Links to Careers Context & Connections

Theme of Sustaining a Thriving NYC Office of Partnerships (Experiential & Career Connections to NYC) Center for College Effectiveness (Faculty Development & Assessment)

City Seminar

Content

Learning Outcomes

Assess-/Assign- ments

GWS

GWS

GWSReading/

Writing (CS I)

Composition I (CS II)

Case Study

Qu

an

tita

tive

R

ea

son

ing

Ethnographies of Work

Statistics

Office of Partnerships

Learning Outcomes

Learning Outcomes

Learning Outcomes

Student Development

New Community College First-Year Core

A learning community comprised of:Fall SpringCity Seminar I City Seminar II & Composition IEthnographies of Work I Ethnographies of Work IIStatistics Statistics

Staff in Student Development and the

Office of Partnerships will provide significant support

for the model.

INDIANA UNIVERSITY-PURDUE UNIVERSITY

Scott E. Evenbeck

Sustaining a Mature General Education Program

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis RISE to the IUPUI Challenge Personal Development Plans (PDPs)

RISE to the IUPUI Challenge

IUPUI developed goals for excellence in: Teaching and learning Research, scholarship, and creative activity Civic engagement

Consistent with those goals, IUPUI is challenging each student to have at least two curricular learning experiences that augment the typical curriculum and that fall within the four areas of curricular excellence that are consistent with the mission of IUPUI

RISE to the IUPUI Challenge

Research International Study Abroad Service Learning Experiential Learning

The challenge: Every student earning a bachelor’s degree will complete at least two of the four types of educational experiences which qualify for appearing on the student’s transcript.

Why RISE?

RISE emphasizes four critical dimensions of experiential learning that are the hallmarks of an IUPUI degree—integrating important high impact programs into the student experience in an intentional way, while advancing the Principles of Undergraduate Learning.

RISE will brand an IUPUI degree as unique and in touch with “Employer Identified Skills” for new graduates (AAC &U, 2007) and will be an integral part of “My IUPUI Experience.”

Personal Development Plan (PDP)

Personal development planning is a process which will enable first year students at IUPUI to understand, implement, and mark progress toward a degree and career goal by creating and following a personalize plan that is open to revision and reevaluation every semester in collaboration with an academic advisor or faculty member.

The PDP is designed to foster:

Goal commitment (student commitment to earning a degree)

Academic achievement (through goal setting and planning)

Curricular coherence and meaning in the first-year seminar

Student development for students in the first year and beyond.

PDP Components

Each PDP will have three components:

Semester in Review – reflection on individual strengths, goals, challenges and strategies for success

Principles of Undergraduate Learning – identification of how the PULs are explicitly connected to academic and career goals

Peak Performance Plan – A plan for specific action steps, courses, and experiential activities leading to the achievement of academic and career goals

YOUR TURN

Questions before the Process: Understanding the Institution and Building Expertise

How does the mission and vision of the institution “describe” the core educational values of the institution? How few learning goals can we use to address the institutional mission and vision?

Questions before the Process: Understanding the Institution and Building Expertise

What national models are available and may any of these be used as a foundation for the new general education? What unique/distinctive characteristics (historic, mission or location driven) of the institution must be incorporated into a national model?

Questions before the Process: Understanding the Institution and Building Expertise

What governance structures must be involved in the consultative/consensus building process? In the decision making process? Who will be key players in the process?

Questions before the Process: Understanding the Institution and Building Expertise

What external or internal factors will delimit the process or the product (fiscal, human, and capital resources, student recruitment pool, and current faculty experience/expertise)? What resources/support is needed to initiate the process?

Questions during the Process: Building a Sustainable General Education Program

Are we discussing courses or learning goals?

Questions during the Process: Building a Sustainable General Education Program

Are we creating vertical and horizontal integration?

Questions during the Process: Building a Sustainable General Education Program

What resources/ support will be needed to implement the new general education? Can we find these resources?

Questions during the Process: Building a Sustainable General Education Program

How will we know if the new program is successful (building the assessment program)?

Questions for Implementation: Comprehensive vs. Incremental Change

What impact will the new general education have on each major/minor program?

Questions for Implementation: Comprehensive vs. Incremental Change

What time frame will be used for implementation?

LESSONS LEARNED

Lessons Learned

AAC&U is Right Student Learning Outcomes Principles of Excellence

Lessons Learned

Student Learning Outcomes Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural

World

Intellectual and Practical Skills, including

Personal and Social Responsibility, including

Integrative and Applied Learning, including

Lessons Learned

Principles of Excellence Aim High – Make Excellence Inclusive Give Students a Compass Teach the Arts of Inquiry and Innovation Engage the Big Questions Connect Knowledge with Choices and Action Foster Civic, Intercultural, and Ethical Learning Assess Students’ Ability to Apply Learning to Complex

Problems

Lessons Learned

AAC&U is Right Again It’s often about high impact practices It’s not about individual courses

Lessons Learned

The curriculum and the co-curriculum have to be “of a piece”

Lessons Learned

Avoid false dichotomies

Lessons Learned

It really is all about student learning

DISPROPORTIONAL IMPACT OF ENGAGED PRACTICES

Source: Kinzie & Evenbeck, “Setting up Learning Communities That Connect with Other High Impact Practices,” Washington Center, Learning Community Summer Institute.

DISCUSSION

RESOURCES

Resources: Managing Gen Ed Reform

Bolman, Lee G., and Terrence E. Deal. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Third ed. 2003

Bolman, Lee G., and Gallos, Joan V. Reframing Academic Leadership. 2011

Gaston, Paul J., and Jerry G. Gaff. Revising General Education—And Avoiding the Potholes: A Guide for Curricular Change. 2009

Kegan, Robert, and Lisa Laskow Lahey. “The Real Reason People Won’t Change.” Harvard Business Review. November, 2001.

Morrill, Richard L. Strategic Leadership: Integrating Strategy and Leadership in Colleges and Universities. 2007.

Schneider, Carol Geary, and Robert Schoenberg. “Habits Hard to Break.” Change. March/April, 2000.

http://www.aacu.org/resources/institutionalchange/index.cfm

Resources: Models and Paradigms

AAC&Uhttp://www.aacu.org/resources/liberaleducation/index.cfmhttp://www.aacu.org/resources/generaleducation/index.cfm

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning

http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/resources

Sullivan, William M. A New Agenda for Higher Education: Shaping a Life of the Mind for Practice. (Jossey-Bass/Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.) 2008.