Multicourse Outcome Assessment

1. Multicourse Outcome Assessment Creating Assessment Community across Disciplines Michael Tew, Eastern Michigan University

2. Central Questions General Education Reform General Education Assessment • What should the EMU student know and be able to do when s(he) graduates? • How do we determine if EMU students know what we think they should and can do what we think they should be able to do when they graduate?

3. General Education Reform • Distribution Model to Outcomes Based Model • Foundations • Disciplinary Knowledge • Writing Intensive • Learning Beyond the Classroom

4. Assessment Initiatives • Foundations Courses (AQIP Project 2005-2007) • Writing Intensive (Pilot began in 2009) • Learning Beyond the Classroom (AQIP proposal 2010) • General Education Multicourse Assessment Project – GEMAP (HLC Assessment Academy Project 2008-2012)

5. Assessment Initiatives • Written Communication – one course/7 outcomes • Community Based • Dialogue Driven • Pedagogically Embedded • Oral Communication – one course/5 outcomes • Nationally Developed Model • Locally Adapted • Pedagogically Embedded

6. Results • We asked – In Dialogue • What do we value in student writing/speaking • What are indicators of student achievement • What do our students know/what can they do • We learned – Through Dialogue • What students know/can do; What we think about teaching and learning; about our assessment methods • We changed – With Dialogue • Instructional Strategy/Pedagogy • Outcomes

7. Multicourse Learning • Quantitative Reasoning • 12 Outcomes • One of Eight courses in four disciplines • Perspectives On a Diverse World • Global Awareness • 5 Outcomes • One of 16 courses in 12 disciplines • US Diversity • 5 Outcomes • One of 20 courses in 14 disciplines

8. Knowledge of the Disciplines • Arts • 6 Outcomes • Two of 20 courses in 5 disciplines • Humanities • 7 Outcomes • Two of 40 courses in 12 disciplines • Social Sciences • 7 Outcomes • Two of 20 courses in 11 disciplines • Natural Sciences • 13 Outcomes • Two of 23 Courses in 7 disciplines

9. Multicourse Assessment • The Challenge: Multiple courses across different disciplines + common outcomes • What are our common values? • What are our common challenges? • Is there a common language? • Can we understand student learning in common ways when learning is manifested in different ways/in different performances

10. Assumptions

11. GEMAP

12. Tools to Facilitate Dialogue • Selection of Naturally Embedded Assignment and Exemplar of Student Work • Guided Questions • Written Reflections • Thematic Analysis – Facilitation Team Work

13. Plan • Over 18 Months: • 7 Focus Groups, 40 Faculty; 4 meetings • 1. Identify Two Outcomes; • What do they mean in your discipline; • Based on naturally occurring outcome reflective assignments, discuss values and challenges; • What worked; What did not

14. Plan • 2. What common themes/language/expectations and understandings emerged from meeting one; • How does that inform our understanding of student learning as reflected in student work

15. Plan • 3 What indicators of student learning emerged from our meeting two discussion; • What can we say about levels of student performance against those indicators (for these outcomes) **This is were the project is right now**

16. Plan • 4. Applying “this rubric” to a portfolio of multidiscipline/multi-genre assignments, • what contribution can we make to our understanding of student learning in General Education • Observations for teaching and learning • Recommendations for Outcomes • Lessons about Process

17. Same End; Different Means • Quantitative Reasoning: • Faculty are using similar activities consistent with a pre-existing instrument in the Math Department; assembling assignment portfolio and conducting rubric training • Global Awareness: • The group has determined that the outcomes miss the point of global awareness and are convening a mini conference on learning in global awareness

18. Same End; Different Means • US Diversity: • Identified indicators of student learning and will complete rubric development; is designing outcome portfolio criteria and collection plan • The Arts: • Is broadening the representation of performances and planning a performance retreat and discussion; investigating assessment measures used in accrediting art education programs

19. Same End; Different Means • Humanities: • Is reviewing vetting proposals for each course to identify qualities/characteristics of the key components for the two outcomes • Natural Sciences: • Direct Assessment: Collecting artifacts for understanding one outcome; to what extent can students apply course concepts to a topic that requires gathering data; Indirect Assessment: Survey students as to what, in the course, did find helpful in facilitating this application.

20. Same End; Different Means • Social Sciences: • Are creating a progress wiki – collecting student work over the course of a semester since, as they discovered, most are using developmental/incremental assignments; a rubric for indicators of progress on the outcomes has been drafted • All are moving, in their own way, froma common starting point - through divergent methods – to a convergence of reasoned, data driven assertions about student learning in General Education

21. Assessment Community of Common Values and Practices

22. The Big Picture • Master Themes • Technique versus Critical Thinking • Understanding versus Application • Reproduction versus Problem Solving • Example versus transcending the example • Retreats, Collectives, Share Fairs, and Transparency • A Platform for understanding knowledge transfer from General Education to Programs

23. Ongoing Improvement • Repeat the Cycle for new outcomes with new facilitators and new focus groups • Resting Points not closed loops • Apply the principle to Writing Intensive Courses • Apply the principle to Learning Beyond the Classroom Courses

24. The Added Values • Prizing Natural Processes • Pedagogy and Teaching at the Center • Faculty at the Helm • Creating Options • For Program Review • For Renewed Faculty Community and Interdisciplinarity • For Faculty Development • Enacting Academic Principles • Value based; Data Grounded • Ongoing Conversation; Continuous Improvement

25. For More Information Dr. Chris Foreman Director, General Education Starkweather Hall Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, MI 48197 734-487-0439 Chris.foreman@emich.edu