IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM 2016 … · rewrite the rubrics and resume assessing...

IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM

2016 - Present

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 3

Assessment Cycle .................................................................................................................................. 3

Assessment Process .............................................................................................................................. 3

Faculty Development ............................................................................................................................ 4

Assessment Ratings ............................................................................................................................... 4

Models of Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 5

Establishing a Baseline .......................................................................................................................... 5

SKILLS SLOS ............................................................................................................................................... 6

Undergraduate Learning Outcome ....................................................................................................... 6

Skills SLO Choices .................................................................................................................................. 6

Skills Rubrics .......................................................................................................................................... 6

Collaboration ......................................................................................................................................... 6

Critical Thinking ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Ethical Reasoning .................................................................................................................................. 7

Information Literacy.............................................................................................................................. 7

Integration ............................................................................................................................................ 7

Oral Communication ............................................................................................................................. 7

Problem Solving .................................................................................................................................... 8

Quantitative Literacy ............................................................................................................................. 8

Written Communication ....................................................................................................................... 8

KNOWLEDGE SLOS .................................................................................................................................... 9

Knowledge Rubrics ................................................................................................................................ 9

Other Actions ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Foundations – Arts .............................................................................................................................. 10

Foundations – Historical Perspectives ................................................................................................ 11

Issues ................................................................................................................................................... 12

Foundations – Life Sciences ................................................................................................................ 12

Foundations – Mathematical Sciences ............................................................................................... 12

Foundations – Philosophy and Literature ........................................................................................... 14

2

Foundations – Physical Sciences ......................................................................................................... 14

Foundations – Social and Behavioral Sciences ................................................................................... 15

Cultures – U.S. Diversity ...................................................................................................................... 16

Cultures – World Perspectives (now Global Perspectives) ................................................................. 16

Foundations -- Writing ........................................................................................................................ 17

COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORTS (CARS) ................................................................................................. 18

Access to the CARS .............................................................................................................................. 18

CAR Tables and Figures ....................................................................................................................... 18

Modifications to the CAR .................................................................................................................... 18

GEC CAR Replies .................................................................................................................................. 20

Recertification Policy .......................................................................................................................... 20

Student Involvement........................................................................................................................... 20

Campus Reporting ............................................................................................................................... 20

Off-campus Presentations and Publications ....................................................................................... 21

PROGRAMMATIC CHANGES .................................................................................................................... 21

Communicating the SLOs to Faculty and Students ............................................................................. 21

Advising Tips........................................................................................................................................ 21

3

The General Education Program is constantly improving the program to maximize learning for all students. Assessment results and suggestions from faculty, students, and trends in higher education help drive the changes made to the program. This section describes the major changes that have been to the General Education (GE) Program since Fall 2016.

ASSESSMENT Assessment Cycle

1. GEC agreed to change from assessing all the courses within a category (i.e., Arts) to spreading the courses within a category across multiple years. This was done in response to Unit Head’s request to distribute the assessment workload over multiple years which increases the likelihood that they can choose tenure track faculty to assess courses. (Jan. 2017)

2. To better distribute the assessment workload, GEC asked faculty whether they would prefer to assess some of the Skill and Knowledge SLOs one year and the rest of the SLOs the following year to distribute the workload over a longer time period. Faculty said they would rather assess all of the outcomes during one semester. (Feb. 2017)

3. GEC changed the assessment cycle for some courses that double dip between Cultures and

Foundations or Cultures and Issues to better manage their workload, thereby potentially increasing the quality of the data. Courses with four or five Skills SLOs will assess half of the outcomes in one three-year cycle and the other half in the next three-year assessment cycle beginning in Fall 2018. (Apr. 2018)

4. GEC suspended the assessment of Skills SLOs for the 18-19 assessment cycle. The current skills rubrics proved to be problematic for many faculty members. GEC will be taking the year to rewrite the rubrics and resume assessing Skills SLOs in 19-20. Knowledge SLOs will still be assessed in 18-19.

Assessment Process

1. In response to faculty members’ requests, the GE Office combined cross-listed courses into one spreadsheet in the assessment management system. (Sept. 2016)

2. To better manage the assessment workload for large section sizes, the GE Office told Unit Heads that they could collect fewer sections than the GE Assessment Plan calls for and they can choose to collect data from some – not all – of the students from multiple sections (maxing out the data collection at the 138 students called for in the GE Assessment Plan). (Feb 2017)

3. The “Principles of General Education Assessment” were updated and posted on the GE website (Apr. 2018)

4

Faculty Development • September 2016 - April 2017 - Collaborative Problem Solving Faculty Learning Community

• January - April 2017 - Challenging Conversations Series

• January 2017 – How Can I Create Meaningful Assignments for My Students?

• January 2017 - How Can I Foster Deep Learning through Critical Reflection?

• January 2017 – April 2017 – The Language of Information Literacy Faculty Learning

Community

• June 2017 – April 2018 - Online/Hybrid General Education Course Professional Development Program

• August 2017 – Solving the Collaborative Learning Conundrum: Strategies for Successful Collaborative Engagement

• August 2017 – Collaborating for Student Learning Success: What One Faculty Learning Community Learned About Increasing Information Literacy

• August 2017 – Data and the Digital World Symposium: Foregrounding Data Literacy in the Classroom

• August 2017 – Data and the Digital World Symposium: Data Visualization in the Classroom

• September 2017 – December 2017 – Evaluating Resources, Misinformation, and Fake News: Promoting Advanced Information Literacy in the Classroom Faculty Learning Community

• January 2018 – Assessment Conference workshop: If You Conclude that “Students Can’t Write Well,” What Steps Should a Department take Next?

• January 2018 – April 2018 – Team-based Learning in the Classroom

Assessment Ratings 1. GEC eliminated faculty assessors’ ability to provide one summary score instead of individual

scores for the Skills objectives (see #2, above). After reading the CARs, it was unclear to GEC how faculty used the rubrics to rate a student’s performance. GEC was concerned about using one summary score because the Skills rubrics were designed to collect a rating for each of the objectives. Also, a summary score does not help focus faculty efforts on the objectives where student performance is weaker. To address these concerns, GEC began requiring faculty to provide ratings for each objective effective in Fall 2016. (Nov. 2015)

2. After a review of CARs from Winter 2017, GEC determined that some assessors were erroneously still using the old method of assessment (i.e., providing a single summary rating for

5

Skills SLOs). An email was sent to instructors who had assessed for GE in the previous cycle to alert them to the fact that the way they had previously assessed the course would no longer be acceptable. The assessment directions were modified as was the assessment PowerPoint used for training faculty in Winter 2018 to help faculty understand the expectations. (Dec. 2017)

Models of Assessment

1. After reviewing the assessment results from 2013-16 (the report is available on the GE website), GEC developed two models to describe describes the expectations of student learning for the Skill and Knowledge SLOs which goes into effect Fall 2018. (Winter 2018)

Knowledge Outcomes – “one exposure” model – students have only one exposure to the Knowledge SLOs in a category (except Social and Behavioral Sciences and Issues); thus, the goal is for the students to achieve Level 3 within a single course – regardless of their year in school or the level of the course. Skills Outcomes – “tree ring” model – students’ develop higher levels of Skills with additional practice; thus, the goal is for the students to achieve Level 3 by the time they graduate. (Winter 2018)

Establishing Baseline Targets for Student Learning

1. After analyzing the data from the 2013-16 assessment cycle, GEC established a baseline for student performance in General Education courses. In keeping with the “tree ring model” of skills development over time, there are different targets for freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors for the Skills SLOs. In keeping with the “one-exposure model” of knowledge, the targets do not vary by year in school for the Knowledge SLOs. (Winter 2018)

Skills Targets: 60% of the freshmen at Level 2 or higher 70% of the sophomores at Level 2 or higher 60% of the juniors at Level 3 or higher, 70% of the seniors at Level 3 or higher Knowledge Target = 70% of the students at Level 3 or higher

2. The GE Office provided faculty assessors with the targets for student performance by students’

year in school on all tables and figures for Skills SLOs beginning in Fall 2018 (GEC provided this data to a small number of faculty assessors in Winter 2018 as a pilot project). (Apr. 2018)

6

SKILLS SLOS

Undergraduate Learning Outcome 1. The Board of Trustees approved the current GE Skills SLOs as GVSU’s Undergraduate Student

Learning Outcomes: collaboration, critical thinking, ethical reasoning, information literacy, integration, oral communication, problem solving, quantitative literacy, and written communication. (April 2017)

Skills SLO Choices 1. GEC agreed to allow Honors courses to pick Skills SLOs more suitable for their multi-course

sequences. (Jan. 2014)

2. The GE Office notified several Unit Heads that a few courses can reduce the overall number of Skills SLOs associated with a course. This occurred when a course double-dips (Cultures and Foundations or Issues). Faculty may have missed that they could have chosen the same Skill SLO for both GE categories. Ten courses were contacted and seven agreed to reduce the number of outcomes associated with their class. (Apr. 2018)

Skills Rubrics 1. The nine Skills goals were renamed Skill Outcomes effective Fall 2017. (Jan. 2017)

2. Based on discussions with faculty, GEC changed the goal of “all graduating seniors” to be at level

3 or higher to “most graduating seniors should be at this level”. (Sept. 2017)

3. Based on discussions with faculty, GEC learned that “Proficient: the level we expect for all graduating seniors” – implied a higher level of learning then GEC intended. GEC changed the name for Level 3 from “Proficient” to “Satisfies” in 2018 to help establish the appropriate expectations for students and faculty effective Winter 2018. (Jan. 2018)

Collaboration

1. The Collaboration rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

2. After reviewing CARs in Fall 2017, GEC determined that one Collaboration objective needed to be revised to better focus faculty assessment. The cells describing the objective were also changed. (Feb. 2018)

Critical Thinking

1. The Critical Thinking rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/collaboration_rubrics(2).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/critical_thinking_rubrics(2).pdf

7

purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

2. A new objective was added to Critical and Creative Thinking:

REASONING-Construct logical conclusions based on reason and evidence. (Apr. 2016) 3. The Critical and Creative Thinking SLO was renamed Critical Thinking (creative thinking was

dropped from the SLO and the rubric beginning in Fall 2017). This was done because the SLO focused on two, rather than one outcome. (Feb. 2017)

Ethical Reasoning

1. The Ethical Reasoning rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

Information Literacy

1. The Information Literacy rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

Integration

1. The Integration rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

Oral Communication

1. The Oral Communication rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

2. After reviewing CARs, GEC noticed that some faculty used group presentations to provide individual oral communication ratings. This is appropriate only if each student gave part of the presentation. GEC modified SAIL so that faculty proposing courses would see the following information: {Students must give individual formal presentations; group presentations are acceptable if every student presents.} This sentence was also added to the Oral Communication rubric. (April 2018)

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/ethical_reasoning_rubrics(2).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/information_literacy_rubrics(2).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/integration_rubrics(2).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/oral_communication_rubrics(2).pdf

8

Problem Solving 1. The Problem Solving rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one

document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

Quantitative Literacy 1. The Quantitative Literacy rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in

one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

Written Communication

1. The Written Communication rubric has changed over time. All versions of the rubric are compiled in one document on the GE website. GEC made a major revision to the rubrics in April 2016. The purpose was to streamline the rubric and resolve ambiguity some faculty had when assessing student learning.

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/problem_solving_rubrics(3).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/quantitative_literacy_rubrics(2).pdf

https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/E318FAA6-9691-29E8-AF089DA7E65B9CC3/written_communication_rubrics(2).pdf

9

KNOWLEDGE SLOS Knowledge Rubrics

1. GEC revised the Knowledge rubric for all Foundations, Cultures, and Issues courses (Nov. 2015). The rubric was used from Fall 2016-Fall 2017:

Assess each student’s work by assigning a score from 1 to 3. Student work at the baseline level gets a score of 1, progressing is 2, and proficient is 3. If the work does not rise to the baseline level, assign a 0 (but give a blank if the work was not done). For the rare case of student work which is markedly better than proficient, assign a 4 (“distinguished”).

Please assign scores based only on the part of the assignment relevant to the Skill assessed. Note that a student might receive an A on an assignment but only a “2” for a General Education Knowledge student learning outcome. Reminder – course grades can never be used for GE assessment purposes. Knowledge Student Learning Outcomes for all Foundations, Cultures, and Issues courses: 3 – Proficient - Level of non-major graduating students 2 – Progressing 1 – Level of entering freshmen

2. GEC revised the Knowledge rubric for all Foundations, Cultures, and Issues courses. This rubric

was used in Winter 2018. The goal is for students to achieve the proficient* level for the Knowledge Student Learning Outcomes by the end of each GE course. Performance levels are described below: 3 = Proficient: Demonstrates a competent understanding by a non-major (not an advanced understanding as would be expected of a student majoring in the discipline) of the Knowledge outcomes described in each of the Foundation, Cultures, or Issues categories; 2 = Progressing: between baseline and proficient 1 = Baseline: Knowledge of a non-major entering the course There are some uncommon instances in which you may assess a student at a higher or lower level. Students who distinguish themselves by performing markedly better than proficient can be given a 4 ("distinguished"), but this rating should be used rarely. Similarly, students who submit work that is below baseline can be given a 0, but this will also be rare. If the student does not complete the assignment(s), you should leave the rating blank. *Students have multiple exposures to the Skills outcomes, therefore, we do not anticipate proficient ratings for the Skills outcomes after a single course (but we do anticipate it by graduation). Students only have one or two exposures to the Knowledge outcomes; thus, they need to achieve proficiency for the Knowledge outcomes within a single course.”

10

3. GEC analyzed the assessment results and presented them in a series of workshops in Winter 2018. At the workshops, when GEC described to faculty the expectations for student performance in the Knowledge outcomes, coupled with feedback received in the CARs, it became clear there was confusion or misalignment with the GE Program’s expectations, in part to do GEC’s evolution in understanding and in part due to GEC’s choice of words. In 2010-2013, GEC suggested faculty use the same method to assess Knowledge and Skill outcomes. After much discussion in Fall 2017-Winter 2018 GEC adopted two models which changed the expectations depending on whether Knowledge of Skills SLOs are being assessed (Skills SLOs = “tree ring model” and Knowledge SLO = “one exposure model”). The assessment results show that more students achieve Level 3 in the Knowledge SLOs associated with Issues course which are taken only by juniors and seniors. This may mean that faculty expectations are too high for the Foundations and Cultures because like Issues, students have only one (or two) exposures to Knowledge SLOs. Faculty may be conflating the student’s year in school/level of the course with expectations (e.g., a freshman in a 100-level Foundation could not be expected to achieve Level 3 whereas a junior in a 300-level issues course could). In the workshops, faculty indicated that the figures describing student performance for the Knowledge SLOs reported in the Course Assessment Reports underreport the level of student learning based on their new understanding of the expectations. In addition, the wording of Level 3 – “proficient: the level we expect for all graduating seniors” - implied a higher level of learning then GEC intended. GEC modified the Knowledge Rubric effective Fall 2018.

The goal is for students to achieve Level 3 for the Knowledge Student Learning Outcomes by the end of each GE course. A student – regardless of major – demonstrates: 4=advanced understanding 3=basic understanding 2=substantial progress toward a basic understanding 1=very limited understanding 0=no understanding Assess each student’s work by assigning a rating from 0 to 4. Leave the assessment spreadsheet blank if the work was not done (do not use a 0 if the student did not do the work). For the rare case of student work that is markedly better than Level 3, assign a 4. Assign ratings based only on the part of the assignment relevant to the knowledge outcome being assessed. Reminder – course grades can never be used for GE assessment purposes. (Winter 2018-present)

Other Actions

1. Knowledge goals were renamed Knowledge Outcomes effective Fall 2017. (Jan. 2017) Foundations – Arts

1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs from focusing on what faculty will do to focusing on what students learn effective Fall 2017.

11

2013-2017 Knowledge SLOs 2017-2019 Knowledge SLOs

Student Learning Outcome 1

An examination of the principles and questions that define the field and analysis of formal elements of works of art.

Explain principles and questions that define the arts and analysis of formal elements of works of art.


How meaning in the arts is created and interpreted.

Explain how meaning in the arts is created and interpreted.


An understanding of the historical and cultural contexts for artists and their works.

Explain the historical and cultural contexts for artists and their works.

Foundations – Historical Perspectives




An understanding of how historical knowledge is created, including chronological thinking, a comprehension of primary sources, and historical analysis and interpretation.

Explain how historical knowledge is created, including chronological thinking, a comprehension of primary sources, and historical analysis and interpretation.


An analysis of different cultures and ways of life, including those of the United States, or a consideration of the common problems and shared humanity among different peoples of the world.

Analyze different cultures and ways of life, including those of the United States, or a consideration of the common problems and shared humanity among different peoples of the world.


An evaluation of historical understanding through the examination of various human endeavors, such as social, political, scientific/ technological, economic, or philosophical/religious/aesthetic activities

Evaluate historical understanding through the examination of various human endeavors, such as social, political, scientific/technological, economic, and philosophical/religious/aesthetic activities.

2. The second Knowledge SLO for the Historical Perspectives category was eliminated. After

reviewing the report summarizing student learning for the Historical Perspectives category in the Historical Perspectives and presenting the information at the fora, GEC – in consultation with the affected units – removed the objective because it did not seem unique to the Historical Perspectives category. The second outcome was eliminated effective Fall 2018 (Analyze different cultures and ways of life, including those of the United States, or a consideration of the common problems and shared humanity among different peoples of the world”). (Apr. 2018)

12

Issues 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs

from focusing on what faculty will do to focusing on what students learn effective Fall 2017.



How to link course material to (the Issue). This outcome was removed


How complementary and competing perspectives contribute to the ongoing discussion about (the Issue).

Explain how complementary and competing perspectives contribute to the ongoing discussion about to (the Issue).

2. One of the Knowledge SLOs for Issues - Linking the course to the Issue - was eliminated because

faculty assessors thought it was too close in meaning to the other SLO. (Feb. 2017)

3. Faculty have a hard time understanding the Information, Innovation, and Technology category. They think there course has to fit all of those topics rather than just one of the three topics. GEC voted to change the name of the category to Issues – Information, Innovation, or Technology. (Sept. 2018)

Foundations – Life Sciences




An introduction to science as a way of investigating and understanding the physical universe.

Explain how life scientists investigate and understand the physical universe.


The unifying concepts of the life sciences such as evolution and cellular organization of organisms.

Explain unifying concepts of the life sciences such as evolution and cellular organization and organisms.

Foundations – Mathematical Sciences 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs



13


The introduction of computer science, logic, mathematics, or statistics as a "way of knowing," including an examination of principles and questions that define the field.

Explain the principles and questions that define computer science, logic, mathematics, or statistics.


An analysis of problem solving, including recognition of key problem elements, the choice of suitable methods for solving a problem, and the appropriate application of these methods.

Apply techniques for problem solving including recognition of key elements, the choice of suitable methods for solving a problem, and the appropriate application of these methods.

14

Foundations – Philosophy and Literature 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs




The introduction of philosophy or literature as a "way of knowing;" an examination of principles and questions that define the field and its contributions to human knowledge and civilization.

Explain the principles and questions that define philosophy or literature and its contributions to human knowledge and civilization.


A consideration of the relationship between the works discussed, the cultures in which they were created, and the human concerns they illuminate.

Explain the relationship between the works discussed, the cultures in which they were created, and the human concerns they illuminate.


The critical analysis and interpretation of one or more primary texts as a major portion of course Knowledge.

Analyze and interpret one or more primary texts as a major portion of course Knowledge.

Foundations – Physical Sciences




The introduction of methodologies scientists use to explore and understand the physical universe.

Explain methodologies physical scientists use to explore and understand the physical universe.


An understanding of how scientists use observations and theory to explain and predict the structure and processes of the physical universe.

Explain ways in which physical scientists use observations and theory to explain and predict the structure and processes of the physical universe.


An examination of fundamental concepts, principles, and issues of the discipline being studied.

Explain fundamental concepts, principles, and issues of the physical sciences.

15

Foundations – Social and Behavioral Sciences 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs




An understanding of how knowledge in the social or behavioral sciences is created and applied.

Explain how knowledge in the social and behavioral sciences is created and applied.


The major approaches, methods, theories, and substantive findings of the field.

Explain major approaches, methods, theories, and substantive findings of the field.


An informed critical stance that will allow students to weigh and apply ideas and claims from the Social and Behavioral sciences outside the classroom.

Weigh and apply ideas and claims from the social and behavioral sciences outside the classroom.

2. The third Knowledge Outcome for the Social and Behavior Sciences category was changed.

Based on the CAR reviews, GEC determined that one outcome needed to be changed to be clearer that the focus was not on doing activities outside of the classroom; the focus is using real-world examples.

Old: Weigh and apply ideas and claims from the social and behavioral sciences outside the classroom. New: Evaluate and apply concepts and theories from the social and behavioral sciences to real-life examples. (Mar. 2018)

16

Cultures – U.S. Diversity 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs




To examine the historical trajectories and consequences, worldviews, languages, and/or ways of life of diverse cultures within the United States.

Explain the historical trajectories and consequences, worldviews, languages, and/or ways of life of diverse cultures within the United States.


To examine how social constructions of ethnicity/race and at least one of the following social attributes shape group and individual identities: gender, class, abilities, age, sexual orientation, religion, or common history.

Explain how social constructions of ethnicity/race and at least one of the following social attributes shape group and individual identities: gender, class, abilities, age sexual orientation, religion, or common history.

Cultures – World Perspectives (now Global Perspectives)




Examine how culture affects people's efforts to understand, use, and survive in their environments, and how these efforts, in turn, affect culture.

Explain how culture affects people’s efforts to understand, use, and survive in their environments, and how these efforts, in turn, affect culture.


Examine within a cultural context the world views, language, or ways of life of societies, nations, regions, or peoples located outside of the United States.

Explain within a cultural context the worldviews, language, or ways of life of societies, nations, regions, or peoples located outside of the United States.

2. Following a review of GVSU peers and selected Michigan colleges and universities, GEC changed the name of the category from World Perspectives to Global Perspectives to more accurately describe the category (effective Fall 2018). (Sept. 2017)

17

Foundations -- Writing 1. Responding to a faculty member’s concerns, GEC changed the wording of the Knowledge SLOs



An understanding of general academic writing conventions for language, development, organization, and format.

Apply general academic writing conventions for language, development, organization, and format.

An awareness of a full range of writing processes, including invention, planning, organizing, revising, and editing.

Engage in the writing process, including invention, planning, organizing, revising, and editing.

Familiarity with at least one academic citation and documentation system (such as MLA or APA style.

Apply at least one academic citation and documentation system (such as MLA or APA style).

18

COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORTS (CARS)

Access to the CARS 1. In response to faculty concerns, GEC moved the CARs from the public access part of the GE

website to a password protected part (accessible by faculty) because the CARs were not written for a public audience. (Feb. 2017)

CAR Tables and Figures 1. Responding to a faculty assessor’s request, GE started providing the number of student ratings

and the percent of student ratings for each SLO on all figures in the CAR. (Feb. 2017)

2. Since GEC adopted the “tree ring” model of skill accumulation over time - effective Fall 2018 - GE will start breaking down the scores by students’ year in school for the CAR tablles. Several, faculty assessors had requested this breakdown as well. (Jan. 2018)

3. GE provided faculty assessors with a figure summarizing all knowledge and skills outcomes together. Since the target for these outcomes is different, this figure was not appropriate once GEC had adopted the two different models of assessment (i.e., Skills=tree-ring, Knowledge=one-exposure). GE stopped providing this figure beginning Winter 2018. (Jan. 2018)

Modifications to the CAR

1. Two new questions were added to the CAR that focus on how faculty will revise their teaching based on what they learned from the previous assessment (effective Fall 2016). (Feb. 2016)

Added: Explain how the information in the previous CAR - and the GEC’s feedback - helped you improve your teaching of the course this time. Explain how the information in the previous CAR - and the GEC’s feedback - helped you improve your assessing of the course this time.

2. One of the questions on the CAR was changed in response to some of the comments faculty made in their CARs (effective Fall 2016). (Feb. 2016)

Old: Are there any contextual factors affecting these results that you would like us to know? (For example: student class standing, faculty experience teaching the course, course format [hybrid/flipped, online], class size, diversity of majors, etc.) New: Is there anything else that may have affected these results? (For example: student class standing, faculty experience teaching the course, course format [hybrid/flipped, online], class size, diversity of majors, etc.).

19

3. GEC changed the directions for the CAR to make it clear that faculty have to provide assessment

scores for each of the three or four objectives that make up the Skills SLO. (Jan. 2017) 4. GEC changed the CAR to ask how each of the three or four objectives that make up the Skills SLO

were assessed. This enabled GEC to understand if faculty are assessing the objectives separately. (Jan. 2017)

5. CARs were modified to include a reminder that grades cannot be used for GE assessment (Feb.

2018)

6. The Header of every page of the CAR was modified to explain to faculty that the rubrics and expectations have changed since the previous CAR (faculty are encouraged to read the previous CAR and CAR Feedback). (May 2018)

7. Targets were added to the CAR tables so GE could see how the students in each course did relative to the Target. It was implemented for a few courses in Winter 2018; it was done for all courses effective with the Fall 2018 assessment.

8. Changes were made to questions 9-14 on the CAR effective Fall 2018 (Sept. 2018) Old: 9. Based on the figures, what conclusions do you draw.

10. Is there anything else that may have affected these results? (For example: student class standing, faculty experience teaching the course, course format [hybrid/flipped, online], class size, diversity of majors, etc.)

11. Based on the results, describe any changes you anticipate making in teaching the course. 12. Based on the results, describe any changes you anticipate making in assessing the course. 13. What else can the GE Program do to help you meaningfully assess student learning? 14. To what extent did the department/unit as a whole (or a subgroup) engage in this

assessment process? New: 9. Based on the figures and tables, what do you conclude about student learning of the GE

outcomes? 10. What else may have affected these results? (For example: student class standing, faculty

experience teaching the course, course format [hybrid, online], class size, diversity of majors, other unforeseen circumstances, etc.)

11. Based on the results, describe the changes you will make in your teaching to improve student learning of the GE outcomes.

12. Based on the results, describe the changes you will make to your assessment of student learning of the GE outcomes.

13. How can the GE Program support you in teaching and/or assessing the GE outcomes?

20

14. How did you involve the department/unit or other instructors of the course in this assessment?

GEC CAR Feedback

1. GEC started providing faculty the previous GE CAR Reply letter when faculty received their CARs to make it easier for them to see what was done in the past. (Feb. 2017)

2. GEC renamed the “CAR Reply” letter “CAR Feedback” to more accurately describe the formative and summative nature of the feedback. (Feb. 2018)

3. Based on the results from the 2013-16 assessment cycle, GEC adjusted its expectations regarding Knowledge SLOs. Students usually have only one exposure to these SLOs. The new expectation for Knowledge SLOs is for students to achieve Level 3 in a single course. In contrast, students develop their Skills SLOs over four years. This change in focus was placed as a Header in all previous CAR Feedback (faculty are encouraged to read the previous CAR and CAR Feedback) to ensure faculty knew that the former language may not be appropriate given today’s perspectives.

4. GEC adopted the use of a CAR Feedback Rubric to help streamline the CAR review process and assist in more meaningful feedback to the CAR authors. (Sept. 2018)

Recertification Policy 1. The GE Recertification process was modified to improve clarity. (Oct. 2016).

2. The GE Recertification process was modified to improve clarity. (Apr. 2018)

Student Involvement

1. GEC discussed repeating the student perception survey from 2014 (described above) of how much students think their Skills have developed in a GE course. The student representative did not think students understand the rubric enough to make the survey very accurate. GEC concurred so a survey was not done. (Feb. 2017)

Campus Reporting

1. The Quality Initiative was presented to the Board of Trustees for approval, submitted to the Higher Learning ComA, and put on the GE website. (April 2017)

21

2. Campus fora were held to share the results from the 2013-16 assessment cycle. Fora were held for each of the Skill and Knowledge areas in Fall 2017 and Winter 2018.

3. The University Academic Senate approved the changes to the Faculty Handbook, which codified many existing practices (e.g., campus-wide reporting system of the GE Assessment results, the Recertification Policy, etc.) and developed some new practices and procedures. (Apr. 2018)

Off-campus Presentations and Publications

1. Griffin, C.B. and M. Cimitile. 2017. Audience Matters: Communicating Results of General Education Assessment to Campus and Public. General Education and Assessment: Design Thinking for Student Learning, AAC&U, Feb. 23-25, Phoenix, AZ.

PROGRAMMATIC CHANGES Communicating the SLOs to Faculty and Students

1. In Fall 2018, all GVSU course updated every Syllabus of Record. The GE Office reviewed and updated the Syllabus of Record to ensure their accuracy with GEC categories. (Jan. 2018)

Advising Tips

1. Advising Tips were distributed to faculty to help them advise students better. (Mar. 2018) Mission Statemnt

1. GEC revised the mission statement. (Aug. 2018) Old Mission Statement: The Grand Valley State University General Education Program provides a broad-based liberal education experience that fosters lifelong learning and informed citizenship. The General Education Program prepares students for intelligent participation in public dialogues that consider that consider the issues of humane living and responsible action in local, national, and global communities. New Mission Statement: The General Education Program prepares students for informed citizenship, leading to responsible participation in local, national, and global communities.

Study Abroad GE had a policy that students could NOT receive U.S. Diversity credit for any course taken through Study Abroad. GEC voted to amend that policy as follows:

Students who participate in a faculty-led program where the course taken abroad is part of the U.S. Diversity category then the student will receive U.S. Diversity credit and NOT Global Perspectives for that course. If they take a second course abroad they will automatically receive Global Perspectives

22

credit. If a student takes a course through a non-faculty-led Study Abroad that discusses U.S. Diversity, then can choose whether they want U.S. Diversity or Global Perspectives but they cannot receive both. (Sept. 2018).

SAIL While reviewing course proposals in SAIL, GEC found that many people missed addressing how they will teach the course. Members decided to change the question to make it clear they must address how the instructor will teach the SLOs. (Oct. 2018) Old: TEACH: Explain how you will teach (e.g., assign readings, discuss in class, use a handout, provide models, etc) students about the student learning outcome. As appropriate, please describe the role of both the students and the instructor. New: Describe the strategies you will use to teach this student learning outcome (e.g. assign readings, discuss in class, use a handout, provide models, peer instruction, etc.).

IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM 2016 … · rewrite the rubrics and resume assessing...

Documents

Transcript of IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM 2016 … · rewrite the rubrics and resume assessing...