posted by Shirlee Geiger and Michele Marden
Should
all SACs address and
assess all 6 of PCC's core
outcomes?
PCC's Learning Assessment
Council (LAC)
will be making a recommendation to the college at the end of Spring
quarter
regarding our assessment process, and we would like to have a LOT of
input from
PCC stakeholders. We have held three 2-hour sessions to get input, as
well as a number of shorter information-sharing meetings in TLCs and in
the meetings of various groups. We are putting out a survey to all
faculty. For those who would like more information before weighing in,
here is some background:
1.
For
continual
program/discipline improvement
of student learning
2. For
competency to
ensure students have meet
the course and degree outcomes
The
faculty on the Learning Assessment Council decided to start with
assessment for the purpose of continual
program/discipline improvement,
thinking this is what would matter most to instructors. After being
told by the NWCCU (our accreditors) that we had to HURRY UP!! (in
August 2010), we then asked CTE SACs
(nursing,
welding, bio-tech etc) to assess the outcomes of
their degrees and certificates,
after they have mapped them to the core outcomes. We hoped this would
work for BOTH purposes of assessment.
LDC/DE SACs (history, philosophy, math, developmental ed) assess the Core Outcomes directly since the Core Outcomes are the basis of the college’s transfer degrees. Want a refresher on PCC's Core Outcomes:? go to: http://www.pcc.edu/resources/academic/core-outcomes/index.html.
We
have some concerns about whether our accreditors are going to be fully
pleased with our process later on down the road.
Two
Conflicts:
Conflict
1:
Students who obtain a transfer degree, take
a variety of LDC courses to obtain their degree. How can we be sure
they have met
the degree outcomes (ie, the core outcomes)?
Two
possible solutions
(perhaps there are more):
1. The
college may
be able to make the argument to the accreditors that the LDC/DE
SACs address and assess the transfer degree outcomes (ie, core
outcomes) for
continual improvement so
broadly that
students will be competent when they graduate. If so, we need LDC/DE
SACs to
incorporate most of the Core Outcomes. This is our current path.
2. The
college may decide to assess for
competency in a different way. Options include a capstone course, a
standardized exam before graduation, or a portfolio. With the impending
Completion Contracts where college funding will based on graduation
rates, putting
additional barriers for graduation may not be in the best interest of
the
college financially. Also, do we deny graduation if a student fails?
Conflict
2:
Assessment of a CTE program’s
degree/certificate outcomes is easier to assess for competency since
students
take specified courses that address the degree/certificate outcomes
that have
been mapped to the Core Outcomes. However, some CTE programs do not
have a
degree/certificate outcome for one (or more) of the Core Outcomes and
expect
that the
LDC/DE courses student
are required to complete
for their degree to meet the missing Core Outcome(s).
Three possible solutions (perhaps there are more):
- The
college may decide that LDC/DE disciplines
should meet CTE program needs. If so, we need the LDC/DE SACs to
incorporate
most of the Core Outcomes in their courses.
- The
college may decide to take away the
student’s freedom to pick the
courses and they must take
courses that fit the
missing core outcomes. If so, students lose what many value about a
college
degree – development of the person for their individualized
choices. Also,
there is a danger that this type of marginalization of the core
outcomes to
specific LDC/DE courses would go against purpose of the Core Outcomes
which are
intentionally broadly defined so that they are applicable in many
different
ways for many different
programs/disciplines.
- The college may decide that the CTE programs need to have at least one degree outcome that would map to each of the core outcomes.
The
faculty Learning Assessment Council is following the national lead of
our union, insisting that we STAND AGAINST the "de-skilling" of the
faculty role. At PCC, we have formed a strong partnership with our
administration, who has trusted faculty to take the lead in ensuring
quality education for our students through relevant and well-crafted
LOCAL assessment of learning outcomes. This means faculty will need to
stay informed of the changing accreditation requirements, and
participate in shaping PCC's response to the swirling changes blowing
through our sector of education, both nationally and internationally. Thank
you for taking the time to think about this issue, and making sure your
experiences and skills help shape the decision on these questions here
at PCC.
No comments:
Post a Comment