Lumina and Tuning meets the DQP

Tim Birtwistle

2

Why ……………………….?

3

Tuning is a five step process comprised of: • defining the discipline core; • mapping employability; • surveying stakeholders; • honing core competencies and learning

outcomes; • drafting degree profiles.

4

Faculty led, students, employers and alumni involved

Tuning USA is a five step process comprised of: • defining the discipline core; • mapping employability; • surveying stakeholders; • honing core competencies and learning

outcomes; • drafting degree profiles.

5

Huba, M.E. & Freed, J.E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. (p. 108). From Kent State Faculty Professional Development Center – February 07 2012.

Old Version New Version

Remembering: can the student recall or remember the information? define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce,state.Understanding: can the student explain ideas or concepts? classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate, recognize, report,select, translate, paraphraseApplying: can the student use the information in a new way? choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret,operate, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write.Analyzing: can the student distinguish between the different parts? appraise, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate,discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test.Evaluating: can the student justify a stand or decision? appraise, argue, defend, judge, select, support, value, evaluate.Creating: can the student create new product or point of view? assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, write.From http://www.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_taxonomy.htmImages from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm

Tuning Logic ModelGeneral Program Theory: Transparent learning outcomes and attainment criteria increase student access, educational quality, degree production and productivity

Evaluation Objective : To develop an evaluation model that documents progress achieved at each Tuning site and across all sites and that provides actionable feedback to a variety of stakeholders (implementation teams, consultants and funders)

INPUTS

INPUTS

OUTPUTS

OUTPUTS

OUTCOMESOUTCOMES

Near-termNear-term IntermediateIntermediate Long-termLong-term

EULuminaUS/EUconsultant

sHigher Ed

Exec Offices

ActivitiesActivities ParticipationParticipation

• Regional teams are formed

• Regional teams meet

• Interaction across states/countries

• Regional teams are formed

• Regional teams meet

• Interaction across states/countries

Discipline focusedregional/state/

country Teams -AA/Short-Cycle

degree faculty - BA/Technical

School/MA faculty

-graduates-employers

Discipline focusedregional/state/

country Teams -AA/Short-Cycle

degree faculty - BA/Technical

School/MA faculty

-graduates-employers

SLOs/Degree Frameworks

(DF)/Qualifications Frameworks

(QF) and competencies established in

targeted disciplines

SLOs/Degree Frameworks

(DF)/Qualifications Frameworks

(QF) and competencies established in

targeted disciplines

SLOs/DFs/QFs and

competencies are field

tested in targeted

disciplines

SLOs/DFs/QFs and

competencies are field

tested in targeted

disciplines

More engaged and better prepared students

More engaged and better prepared students

Common vocabulary

established for Tuning partners

Common vocabulary

established for Tuning partners

Increasedproduction of certificate and degree holders, particularly

among underrepresent

ed groups

Increasedproduction of certificate and degree holders, particularly

among underrepresent

ed groups

Increased access into and across segments

Increased access into and across segments

Departments engage in

Tuning process

Departments engage in

Tuning process

Institutions engage in

Tuning process

Institutions engage in

Tuning process

Institutionalization of Tuning Process

Institutionalization of Tuning Process

DRAFT

9

What do learners need? Skills!

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Legislators, senior officials and managers

Professionals

Technicians and associate professionals

Clerks

Service workers; shop and market

sales workers

Skilled agricultural and fishery workers

Craft and related

trades workers

Plant; machine operators

and assemblers

Elementary occupations

1990200020102020

Changing occupational structure 1990 - 2020(EU-27 + NO and CH)

Source: Cedefop 2010

10

Changing demands for skillsPreparing future professionals and citizens with the right skills

‘21st century skills’Creativity and innovation, Critical thinking, Problem solving, Communication, Collaboration, Information fluency, Technological literacy

Changing skill demand with the advent of the knowledge economy

40

45

50

55

60

65

1960 1970 1980 1990 2002

Routine manual

Nonroutine manual

Routine cognitive

Nonroutine analytic

Nonroutine interactive

Accelerating trend since 1990s

Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US)Levy and Murnane

11

Semiotics/Vocabulary• Learning outcomes (LOs)• Active LOs (not in a desk drawer)• Ratchet up – it is ALL in the verbs• Level descriptors/Levels • ALT (not TLA or even LTA)• Student centred learning (LOs/ALT)• Frameworks (Russian Dolls +)• Time – linear/volume – LLL – APL/APELSo – from the ‘bottom up’ – design, delivery,

assessment, evaluation, re-design >>>>>>

Tuning meets QF:

Macro QF – levels -

descriptors

Micro Tuning – ratcheting up – all in the verbs

12

LEARNING

Tuning = Subjects, QF = Degrees

Tuning

Architecture

Framework

Outcomes

QF

Architecture

Framework

Outcomes

13

14

The Future is about LEARNING• Students want to learn• Quality is about learning• Life long learning in a fast changing world is

a must• Skills and abilities will last and develop, jobs

will change

~~~ know, understand and be able to do ~~~~~~

Because the future is now.