Program Outcomes and Assessment Foundations Program Outcomes

Program Outcomes and Assessment
Foundations
January 28, 2014
Program Outcomes
Individual Foundations courses have common outcomes, syllabus, and assessment practices. They also
fulfill Foundations and University outcomes. Foundations outcomes align with University outcomes.
Program-level outcomes apply to all Foundations courses. 100-level courses and FDCNC 350 have
individual course-level outcomes. For 200-level courses (FDCA and FDSCI), outcomes are for a group of
courses in a given area. Some courses are taken by all BYU–Idaho students, while others are chosen
according to personal preference and interest. Some courses are designed to be permanent fixtures of
the academic program at BYU-Idaho. 200-level Science and Cultural Awareness Foundations courses are
designed to explore current topics and are intended to rotate in and out of the program.
Foundations Program Outcomes
1. Students will learn how to learn:
a. Discover knowledge across a variety of media.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
2. Lifelong learners
b. Test hypotheses by collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350
Supports the following University Outcomes:
2. Lifelong learners
3. Creative and critical thinkers
c. Identify key assumptions and theories in oral and written sources.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
4. Effective communicators
d. Experience the arts both cognitively and affectively.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
e. Search the scriptures as a source of gospel instruction.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
1. Disciple leaders
2. Students will learn how to think:
a. Identify reliable sources of information.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDENG 101, FDENG 201, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
b. Apply quantitative reasoning skills to inform their decisions.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
c. Use empirical evidence to shape their ideas and opinions.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDENG 101, FDENG 201, FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
d. Articulate the responsibilities that come with freedom.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
6. Engaged citizens
e. Enrich their understanding of other times and cultures with knowledge and empathy.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
2. Lifelong learners
f.
Shape their life, including their intellectual and professional pursuits, with their faith.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
2
1. Disciple leaders
3. Students will learn how to communicate:
a. Express ideas with clear, engaging, and confident speech.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
4. Effective communicators
b. Express ideas in clear and effective writing.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
4. Effective communicators
c. Work with groups across disciplines to solve problems
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
1. Disciple leaders
4. Effective communicators
d. Articulate value assessments about quality in the arts.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201
Supports the following University Outcomes:
2. Lifelong learners
3. Creative and critical thinkers
e. Express creativity across a variety of media.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201
Supports the following University Outcomes:
3. Creative and critical thinkers
f.
Act as informed citizens in their congregation, community, nation, and world.
Supported by the following Foundations courses:
FDAMF 101, FDCA 101, FDCA 200’s, FDWLD 101, FDWLD 201, FDENG 101, FDENG 201,
FDMAT 108, FDSCI 101, FDSCI 200’s, FDCNC 350, FDREL 200
Supports the following University Outcomes:
1. Disciple leaders
6. Engaged citizens
3
Faculty outcomes for the Foundations program are as follows:
• Faculty will implement the principles and processes of the BYU-Idaho Learning Model.
• Faculty will work with colleagues across disciplines, colleges, and departments.
• Faculty will create significant learning and teaching experiences by working in teaching teams
and participating in a culture of mutual peer observation.
• Faculty will have experience significant personal and professional development as a result of the
cross-disciplinary nature of Foundations.
All Foundations courses share the following common practices (Foundations Learning Environment):
• Foundations courses are carefully focused to provide opportunities for students to engage
deeply in the subject matter.
• All courses are cross-disciplinary.
• All courses fully implement the BYU-Idaho Learning Model.
• All courses are taught by teams who collaborate in the development and delivery of course
material.
• All sections of a course share a common syllabus, outcomes, and assessment measures.
• Teaching teams meet often to discuss curriculum and teaching techniques.
Assessment Plan
Foundations is overseen by the Dean of Foundations and Interdisciplinary Studies, who works
under the Associate Academic Vice President for Curriculum. He is assisted by an Associate
Dean of Foundations and an Associate Dean of Interdisciplinary Studies. Teaching teams, led by
a Team Lead and working in cooperation with the Dean of Foundations, have responsibility for
individual courses and conduct course-level assessment of specific learning outcomes.
Additionally, members of each teaching team individually conduct a course assessment to
assure coordination of outcomes, pedagogies, content, etc. The individual and collective
assessments provide valuable information for analysis of course effectiveness, providing
impetus for change and improvement. The aggregated data is reported to various key
stakeholders: Academic Council, Curriculum Council, and the President’s Council.
The Foundations program uses an assessment plan based upon Barbara Walvoord’s Assessment
Clear and Simple. The plan was formulated in Winter of 2012 and has been in place since Fall of
2012.
Guiding Principles
1. Assessment is the process by which we think critically about our courses and our
teaching. It is a dialectic between the course team and the Foundations administration.
2. We should always assess for a higher purpose, and then use the data we generate to
satisfy demands to demonstrate our effectiveness. We must never assess for
assessment’s sake. The higher purpose of assessment is course improvement. The
higher purpose of course improvement, in turn, is student improvement.
3. Assessment is part of the teaching process. Our outcomes should be tied to the
knowledge and skills required for the course. We assess these outcomes to enhance and
evaluate students’ abilities.
4
4. Our assessment instruments should be aligned with our curriculum. Assessment
should primarily be tied to regular course activity, not to external instruments.
5. We should assess the process of education, not the product. Assessing each student
(the product) to prove that they meet a standard necessitates a culture of remediation
rather than course improvement. A remedial path diverts attention and resources from
course improvement. We can assess the process using samples rather than inspecting
each student. Assessing the process leads to improvements in the process, and hence
reliably better results.
6. An assessment plan should make use of things faculty are already doing. Much of the
data we need is already being generated by exams and assignments currently
embedded in our courses. Our primary task is to improve the “digestion” of this data:
a. The team follows the method explained in Barbara Walvoord’s Assessment Clear
and Simple—it sets course outcomes, develops an assessment plan, administers
assessments, determines an appropriate response to the data, and reports its
findings and action plan to the Foundations administration.
b. The Foundations administration sets programmatic outcomes, aggregates data
given them by the teams, reports regularly to the University administration, and
engages the teams in a conversation about course and assessment
improvements.
7. We need to start the process of course improvement from where we are rather than
getting bogged down in composing impeccable outcomes, creating reliable and valid
instruments, or developing complicated assessment plans. We start with existing
outcomes and assessments, examine results, and then talk about improvements.
8. The processes of course improvement and faculty evaluation should be kept separate.
The Foundations administration and team leadership are primarily responsible for
course improvement. Assessments tied to the Continuing Faculty Status (CFS) process
must be independent of the course improvement cycle. The ability to take risks and
conduct experiments is essential to the process of continuous improvement.
5
Adaptation of Barbara Walvoord’s “No-frills” Assessment
Process:
1. Map Foundations program outcomes to courses
2. Engage each team in the Walvoord plan:
a. Each team currently has outcomes defined for their course
b. Teams identify two instruments: one direct, one indirect
c. Teams administer the assessment instruments as a normal part of the course
d. Teams meet to look at the data, decide upon action
e. Team leads report the instruments, the results, and the action plan to the Foundations
administration (one page report)
3. Tie team assessment report to outcomes map—report shows the semester in which each team
assessed the outcome.
4. Report assessment activities and reports on an internal website.
5. Make an annual report to the President’s Council that includes outcomes map data, data from
student evaluations, and University Report Card data (see below).
6. Work with teams to improve all aspects of the process: course and program outcomes,
assessments, and learning and teaching
Institutional Assessment
Because the development and implementation of Foundations is a key institutional objective, it
is part of the University Report Card. The availability of this data enables the University
community to view the current status of outcome achievement. To measure the effectiveness
of the Foundations Program, the University Report Card employs three outcomes, each with its
own indicators, shown in the following table.
6
Foundations Metrics for University Report Card
Outcome
1. Graduated students manifest
traits of a lifelong learner.
2. Students are better able to write,
speak, analyze, and think
Indicator
Percentage of alumni who engage in
lifelong learning.
Critical thinking (seniors vs. national
sample
Critical thinking (seniors vs.
freshmen)
Writing (seniors vs. national
sample).
Writing (seniors vs. freshmen)
3. Foundations courses undergo
rigorous quality assurance.
Percentage of courses integrating
the Learning Model
Percentage of courses that have
syllabi content in common
Percentage of teaching groups that
meet regularly
Percentage of teaching groups
engaged in peer classroom
observation
Percentage of Foundations sections
visited by the Dean, Associate Dean,
or Team Lead within the past year
Percentage of faculty who received
a load release to prior to teaching
first semester of a course
Instrument
Alumni survey
CAAP test published by ACT
Value added freshman to senior in
comparison with CAAP
CAAP
Value added freshman to senior in
comparison with CAAP
Team Lead questionnaire
Team Lead questionnaire
Team Lead questionnaire
Team Lead questionnaire
Class visitation reports by Dean,
Associate Dean, and Team Leads
Load releases for Foundations
instructors (excluding FDENG,
FDMAT, and FDREL)
Assessment Data
The reports produced by each of the Foundations teams are available at:
https://inet.byui.edu/sites/Accreditation/Shared%20Documents/Foundations/
The rows of the following table list the Foundations program outcomes and the columns indicate
when each of the teams has assessed that outcome.
As of January 2014, 92% of the teams have submitted assessment reports for at least one of the
outcomes. This is an increase from only 58% in the Spring 2013 semester. The Foundations Office
encourages each team to choose assessment activities that will best benefit their course. Teams are
free to determine how these assessments are implemented. Without any managerial influence, 94%
of the Foundations program outcomes have been assessed by at least one team.
7
FDREL 200
F12
FDCNC 350
FDSCI 206
F12
FDSCI 208
FDSCI 205
FDSCI 204
FDSCI 203
FDSCI 202
FDSCI 201
FDSCI 200
FDSCI 101
FDMAT 108
FDENG 201
FDENG 101
FDWLD 201
FDWLD 101
FDCA 206
FDCA 205
FDCA 204
FDCA 203
FDCA 202
FDCA 201
FDCA 101
Foundations
Program
Outcomes
FDAMF 101
Summary of Foundations Outcomes Assessment
Students will learn how to learn:
Discover
knowledge
F12
F13
F13
F13
W13
F12
F12
F12
F12
S13
S13
F12
S13
F13
Test hypotheses
Identify
assumptions
F13
F13
S13
W13
W13
S13
S13
F12
F13
Experience arts
F13
S13
F13
F12
S13
S13
Search the
scriptures
F13
Students will learn how to think:
Identify sources
F12
Quantitative
reasoning
F13
W13
F12
S13
W13
S13
S13
F13
Use empirical
evidence
Responsibilities of
freedom
S13
S13
F12
F13
S13
W13
F13
Knowledge and
empathy
F12
S13
W13
F12
F12
F12
F13
S13
Shape life with
faith
F13
F12
Students will learn how to communicate:
Effective speech
Effective writing
W13
S13
F12
F13
F13
W13
F12
S13
S13
Work with groups
F13
Assess quality
F12
F13
Express creativity
Informed citizens
F13
S13
W13
F13
Witness of Christ
The entries in the table above are hyperlinks to the team reports. The full collection is available at:
https://inet.byui.edu/sites/Accreditation/Shared%20Documents/Foundations/
8
F13
Analysis and Improvement Plan
Each team meets to discuss the assessment activities of a given semester. Based on their observations,
the team implements course improvement strategies. Teams have implemented several curricular
changes: writing course materials, developing group projects, introducing assessments or assessment
items, changing required readings, revising lesson plans, etc.
As part of the team course improvement (assessment) report, teams recommend changes to
Foundations to better meet the needs of the students and faculty. These are reviewed by the Dean of
Foundations and Interdisciplinary Studies and the Associate Dean of Foundations. Each fall, as part of
the pre-semester meetings, a faculty meeting for all Foundations instructors is held. As part of this
meeting, faculty members can provide written and oral recommendations for improving Foundations.
The written suggestions can be submitted anonymously. The oral suggestions are discussed with the
entire faculty and the written ideas are reviewed by the Foundations Office.
The Foundations Office is engaged in several improvement projects for the coming year.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Improve the quality of the team course improvement efforts
Maintain a culture of continuous course improvement through assessment
Release competency-based versions of the gateway Foundations courses
Develop new face-to-face, hybrid, online, and competency-based Foundations course offerings
Rotate out some of the current course offerings
Strengthen the team structure
Replace large teaching teams with smaller teams
Enhance the appeal of Foundations courses to students
Support faculty development, including travel and curriculum development
Provide reliable enrollment forecasts to colleges and departments
Increase the proportion of transfer credits that can be applied toward Foundations courses
University Outcomes (For Reference)
The purpose of a BYU-Idaho education is to help students to become
1. Disciple leaders
2. Lifelong learners
3. Creative and critical thinkers
4. Effective communicators
5. Skilled professionals
6. Engaged citizens
9