building bridges - commission on colleges handouts/cs-203_barr… ·  · 2016-10-20building...

Building Bridges:

Implementing and Integrating QEP Assessments on Your Campus

IL YOUNG BARROWUniversity of Louisville

2016 Assessment Institute in Indianapolis

18 October 2016

1

2

Outcomes

• To identify ways to communicate and

engage your campus community from

both a top-down and bottom-up

approach in implementing change at

their institution;

• To apply our lessons learned to

address similar challenges at their

institution;

• To relate to the various stakeholders in

creating an authentic path to

integrating meaningful change on your

campus.Image taken from https://dnewmanpaintings.wordpress.com

3

Session Overview

• Our Quality Enhancement Plan

(QEP): What is it?

• The issues at hand

• Assessment of QEP and

student learning: A tale of 2

Stories

• Lessons Learned

• Q&A

4

A Prologue

• Education as a way

of gaining

knowledge

• Knowledge as Truth

• Truth as correct

• The Specter of the

Cave

• Mission: Kentucky’s premier, nationally

recognized metropolitan research

university

• Located: Louisville, KY

• Total Enrollment: 22,367 (Fall 2015)

• Academic Colleges & Schools: 13

• Degree programs: 200+

• 2010-2011 Degrees Awarded: 4,938

• # of Faculty: 2,403

• # of Staff: 4,595

Data provided by Institutional Research and Planning

About the University of Louisville

5

6

What is the Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)?

QEP Timeline at UofL

• Implemented: Fall 2007

• Interim Impact Report: March 2013

• Integration with full report: 2017

Two Integrated Outcomes

1. Students will be able to think critically

2. Students will develop the ability to

address community issues

7

UofL’s QEP: Ideas to Action (i2a)

8

Culminating Undergraduate

Experiences

(CUE)

Discipline-specific CT in

the majors

Critical Thinking (CT)

skills in Gen Ed

Common language, explicit reference to critical thinking skills

Our goals across the undergraduate curricula

9

Student

Affairs

Career

Services

Campus

Health

Services

First Year

Initiatives

Undergraduate

Academic

Advising

REACH

Civic

Engagement,

Leadership

and Service

Cultural

Center

10

Issues at hand

• Task with developing, implementing, and

integrating a Quality Enhancement Plan

• “Political Anarchy” (Siloed)

• Stay focused on the outcomes

• Supplementation versus Supplantation

• Demystifying Assessment

• Multi-pronged approach

• Take a snapshot from the institutional POV

• Identify the easiest point of entry

• Laying the foundation for bottom-up plan

• Provide faculty and programs with development

opportunities and incentives• Enhance faculty development opportunities

• Faculty Learning Communities

• Institutes and Guest Speakers

• Implementation and innovation grants

• Build and maintain ongoing relationships

11

Phase I: Needs Assessment and Backward Design

12

National

Surveys

General

Education

Quality

Measurement

System

Student

Opinion Survey

Annual

Student

Learning

Outcomes

(SLO)

Reports

Course

Artifacts

(e.g. syllabus,

assignments,

rubrics)

Unit-based

Initiatives

Pieces we started with at UofL (2007)

13

Paul Elder

Framework CAAP

Critical

Thinking

Critical

Thinking

ToolsCUEi2a

Assessment

Plan

Environmental

Enhancements

What was missing to make i2a work?

14

Putting the pieces together

“The general education

program at the University of

Louisville fosters active

learning by asking students to:

1. think critically,

2. communicate effectively,

3. understand and

appreciate cultural

diversity.”

15

What is the role of General Education in i2a?

Rubrics

• Critical Thinking

• Mathematics (Critical

Thinking)

• Natural Science (Critical

Thinking)

• Cultural Diversity

• Effective Communication

General Education Website:

http://louisville.edu/provost/ger/

16

How do we assess our students’ progress?

17

(CT1) Claim: States thesis; Identifies purpose; Demonstrates recognition of problem or question

(CT2) Evidence: Uses evidence, information, data, observations, experiences, and/or reasons

(CT3) Inference: Makes a logical argument; Develops a line of reasoning based on evidence

*(CT4) Point of View: Identifies and evaluates multiple points of view (different cultural values, a different

theoretical framework, or a different methodology)

(CT4) Influence of Context and Assumptions

(CT5) Implications: Evaluates implications, conclusions, and consequences

* CT4 was modified in 2013 with feedback from the General Education Curriculum Committee (GECC) and Assessment

Subcommittee. The rubric now more closely aligns with the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U)

VALUE Rubric for Critical Thinking.

2.70

2.46

2.66

2.08 2.06

2.28

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

CT1 CT2 CT3 *CT4 CT4 CT5

Mean

CT1

CT2

CT3

*CT4

CT4

CT5

What have we learned?

18

• Direct measure

• Collegiate Assessment of Academic

Proficiency (CAAP) Critical Thinking

Test

• Indirect Measure

• National Survey of Student

Engagement (NSSE)

CAAP Critical

Thinking

National

Surveys

(NSSE)

Unpacking two measures

19

CAAP Critical Thinking @ UofL

20

NSSE

21

• Developed together and embedded at

the program, unit, and institutional

level

• Defining Features

•Mastery, reflection, integration

•Authentic issues

• CUE self-reflections and evaluations

• Applied Critical Thinking Rubric

• 100% CUE

Culminating Undergraduate Experience (CUE)

2014-2016 i2a Assessment Plan

22

Annual

SLO

Reports

i2a

Assessment

Plan

Revisit the Annual Student

Learning Outcomes report

Aligning our practices

Phase II: 2014-16 i2a Assessment Plan

• Builds on foundational i2a work to date

• Measures critical thinking and CUE

integration for undergraduate programs

• Required university-wide data

collection

• Unit-defined plan for each semester

• Provides feedback to units/academic

programs

• Prepares us for 2017 reaccreditation

process

23

24

What is your story?

25

• Communicate and collaborate closely with the i2a team as we

engage in the 2014-16 i2a Assessment Plan.

• Maintain consistent and ongoing communication with your faculty

about the importance of participating in this effort.

• Consider how your programs will sustain these efforts related to i2a

beyond the 2014-16 assessment plan and what resources/support you

need from the i2a team.

• Continue to provide the i2a team with ongoing feedback on our

processes and reporting efforts.

• Work with your i2a unit leadership team and faculty facilitator to keep

communication lines open.

Your role in the i2a Assessment process

26

i2a Feedback

27

Critical Thinking Inventories

28

Institutional Lessons Learned

• Start small, do it well, then expand

• Set goals, be honest, encourage, and support

• You will change the landscape, expect the same

• Balance common goals with autonomy and unit-specific needs

• You have allies

29

Big Picture Takeaway

Thank you.

IL YOUNG BARROWQEP Specialist for Assessment

i2a/QEP Team

Delphi Center for Teaching & Learning

University of Louisville

Ph. 502-852-5105

Email. il.barrow@louisville.edu

30