Meeting Faculty Where They Are:

Strategies for Effective Curricular and

Student Learning Outcomes Assessment

Donna Chamely-Wiik, Anthony Ambrosio and Patricia Heydet-Kirschhttp://www.fau.edu/ouri

2016 Annual SACSCOC MeetingDecember 7, 2016

Intended Outcomes

Faculty Readiness For Curricular Change

What are your biggest challenges working with faculty in regard to curricular change?

Curricular Change Support Mechanisms

Pre-proposal elements-$$$-Grant Levels -Design Elements

Full proposal elements-Workshops and one-on-ones-Course Plan Worksheet – Tool-Rubric development - Tool

Assessment design- Course Plan Worksheet-Revised - Coaching realistic expectations- Faculty survey - Tool

Curriculum Grant Preproposal LevelsLevel Description Funding

Assignment To develop or redesign a portion of their course (usually one assignment and one

assessment).

For faculty who wish to start small and build up to course and program level

changes at a later time.

$500-

$1000

Single Course To develop or revise the entire course to incorporate multiple research and inquiry

assignments throughout.

For faculty who wish to create a course that bridges student skills and knowledge

between courses in a program, or those who want to revise their course first

before attempting larger program changes.

Up to

$5000

Dept/Program Level

(Multiple Courses)

To build connections between courses to ensure students engage in research and

inquiry learning activities throughout their program experience, by incorporating

research and inquiry assignments within multiple courses throughout a program.

Up to

$10,000

College Level

(Multiple Courses-

Single College)

To ensure that courses across programs deliver research and inquiry experiences

to their students.

For colleges who target similar research-related targets independent of their

programs or that have key courses that need to be interconnected.

Up to

$15,000

Inter-College Level

(Multiple Courses-

Multiple Colleges)

To cooperate by enhancing courses shared in specific programs or who have

interdisciplinary majors (to augment resources for colleges already attempting this

cooperative endeavor).

Up to

$20,000

Preproposal Design Elements

Category Rating

Teaching/Learning Strategies: The extent of the URI enhancements and the degree that they are student-

centered and promote the specified learning targets.

Assignments and Assessment: The degree of alignment between the learning targets, the learning activities,

and the methods of assessing student performance

Sustainability: The degree that the curricular change(s) fits into the course/program(s)--(For

Program and College level applications), the extent that the project aligns with the department's vision for the course/program, and the degree of support from the department chair to make the enhancement a permanent change.

Intensity and Impact: The number of learning areas targeted, and the scope of impact (i.e., how many

students, courses, and programs are impacted annually).

Feasibility: The degree that the resources are adequate for the activities, and the timeline is appropriate

TOTAL

Review Instructions: Please rate each category from 1-3:

3 = Exemplary

2 = Adequate

1 = Inadequate or Needs Improvement

Full Proposal ElementsMechanisms:

• Workshops

• One-on-one sessions

Tools:

• Course Plan Worksheet

• Rubric development sheets

• Assessment Design Survey

• Curriculum mapping

• Livetext and EAC data management

7

Course Plan Worksheet

8

ASSIGNMENT STUDENT PRODUCTWhat will students

produce? (tangible

and assessable)

TEACHING STRATEGIESWhat teaching

methods are

employed?

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

What will students

be doing?

SLOsWhich

SLO’s are

targeted?

SCORING CRITERIAHow will you discriminate

between developing,

competent and exemplary

work?

Writing a

project

summary 1

5-page description of

scientific problem,

math formulation,

tools and methods,

results, conclusion

Guided discussion while

creating a sample

summary in class

Group discussions,

in- class writing,

modifying

computerprograms

1A –

Vocabulary

and Basic

skills – at the

Skill-Building

level

DTD Student Achievementrubric

1A (SB) – how well students

use basic vocab, math skills,

computer skills,

Rubric Development: A Key to Rigor of Assessment and Evaluation

1. Adopting the Common Rubric Developed by the Initiative

2. Adapting the Common Rubric Developed by the Initiative

3. Anchoring to the Common Rubric Developed by the Initiative

Validity

Internal

External

9

Adapting

10

SLO Indicator Exemplary Competent Developing

Kn

ow

led

ge

Theoretical

Frameworks

or Genres

Recognizes and differentiates

key theoretical frameworks,

genres, or previous works

within the discipline for the

question or problem to be

explored and is able to select,

or adapt (to) them, or

associate them with other

disciplines

Recognizes key theoretical

frameworks, genres, or previous

works within the discipline for the

question or problem to be explored

but cannot differentiate, select, or

adapt (to) them, nor associate them

with other disciplines

Minimally recognizes key theoretical

frameworks or previous works within

the discipline for the question or

problem to be explored. A lack of

differentiation, selection, or adaption

(to) them, nor associate them with

other disciplines

Kn

ow

led

ge Theoretical

Frameworks

or Genres

Recognizes and differentiates

key theoretical frameworks,

legal theories, or source of

law genres, or previous works

within the discipline for the

question or problem to be

explored and is able to select,

or adapt (to) them, or

associate them with other

disciplines outcomes

Recognizes key theoretical

frameworks, legal theories, or

source of law genres, or previous

works within the discipline for the

question or problem to be explored

but cannot distinguish them from

other theories or applications

differentiate, select, or adapt (to)

them, nor associate them with other

disciplines

Minimally recognizes key theoretical

frameworks, legal theories, or source

of law or previous works within the

discipline for the question or problem

to be explored. A lack of

differentiation, selection, or adaption

(to) them, nor associate them with

other disciplines. Does not distinguish

key legal theories or concepts from

concepts identified as being relevant

for this issue.

Anchoring

Questions for One-on-One Professional Development Activities

1. Define your learning outcome in a sentence or two.2. Given your assessment, describe in as much detail as possible what a student

performance would look like if the student “really got it.” follow-ups:“what stands out as an exemplary performance in your mind?”“what would a top student say/do/get/display/perform/write/etc.?”

3. What would it look like if the student performed at the lowest level?follow-ups:“what are common mistakes/misperceptions/missteps by students?”“what are some examples of advice you give students?”

11

Assessment Design Survey

Course Prefix

and Number

# of Sections in

Grant

2016-2017 2017-2018

Fall 2016 Spring 2017 Fall 2017 Spring 2018

Course #1 BUL4424 1

Course #2

Course Instructor Names Anticipated

Enrollment

#1 P****** A***** 50

#2

SLO(s)

Time

Beginning of Semester--------------------------Midterm----------------------------End of Semester Final

1.a.i –Knowledge:

(Vocab/Skills)

Definition, identify

issues

2.a.sb FQ (Relevant Issues) Identify topic for

project

Topic Revision (Not

formally assessed)

2.b – FQ (Rationale)

4.d – Critical Think

(Conclusions)

Pre-Test (Watson-

Glaser)

Conclusion of

project

Post Test (Watson-Glaser)

6.a.sb – Communication

(Clarity)

Project Presentation

Department(s): Accounting (SOA)Please list each CGP course (e.g., ABC 3040) you are teaching and indicate (X) each semester it will be offered:

Please list the instructor for each course identified above along with anticipated enrollment:

Please indicate the assessment design for each course (i.e., summative, pre-post, multi-point).

Assessment Results

1. Single course or assignment

2. Multiple Courses in a discipline/program/college

– Side by Side Courses

– Scaffolded Courses

3. Multiple courses in multiple colleges

Single Course or Assignment

Assessment Results• Single Course Model

Knowledge

Formulate Questions

Ethical Issues

Communication

PGY4440C Research Documentary: Midterm Draft

Knowledge

Formulate Questions

Ethical Issues

Communication

PGY4440C Research Documentary: Final

Assessment Results• Multiple Courses in a Discipline/Program

EDF 2005 First Draft, Final Draft

EDF 2085 First Draft, Final Draft

KnowledgeCritical Thinking

Communication

KnowledgeCritical Thinking

Communication

KnowledgeCritical Thinking

Communication

KnowledgeCritical Thinking

Communication

Assessment Results• Scaffolded Courses

KnowledgeCritical ThinkingCommunication

NUR 4165 Research Assignment

Critical Thinking

Formulate Questions

NUR 4945 Research Assignments

NUR 4945L Research Project Dissemination

KnowledgeFormulate QuestionsPlan of Action: DesignPlan of Action: ImplementationPlan of Action: Data CollectionCritical Thinking: AnalysisEthical ConductCommunication

Assessment Results• Cross Discipline Plan

Integrating Geomatics Engineering, Civil Engineering, Geology, and Geography

GEO 3910 served as the introduction, Research I:

Formulate questions: RationalePlan of Action: MethodsCritical Thinking: AnalysisEthical ConductCommunication

Cross-discipline ProductsCGN/GEO 3910 Research 1GEO 4275 Human-Environmental Interactions GLY 4822 Hydrogeology CGN 4911 Research 2

Continuous Improvement

1. Annual report: Content related to student

learning• Explicit instruction on the purpose of feedback and key phrases used by

instructors. (i.e. What does “needs depth” mean and how do I “make the

paper balanced?”)

• Activities that give students in-class practice with creating and editing APA

citations.

• Additional practice creating quality research questions.

2. Integrity of student learning assessment

How have you or will you address your biggest challenges working

with faculty in regard to curricular change?

Have we got you thinking…. How can we help?

– Donna Chamely-Wiik: dchamely@fau.edu

– Anthony Ambrosio: aambrosio@fau.edu

– Patricia Heydet-Kirsch pheydet@fau.edu