The “Quality Agenda:” Implications for Assessment, Policy, and Professional Accreditation Peter T. Ewell National Center for Higher Education Management.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Karl Donert, National Teaching Fellow HERODOT Project coordinator HERODOT: Benchmarking Geography.
Advertisements

Learning Outcomes & Staff Development Dr Lorraine Walsh, University of Dundee Bologna Stakeholder Conference February 2008 Heriot.
Official BFUG Bologna Seminar ENHANCING EUROPEAN EMPLOYABILITY July 2006 University of Wales Swansea.
What is the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP)? 2012 Institute on Integrative Learning and the Departments July 12, 2012 Carol Geary Schneider.
The University of Melbourne > Centre for the Study of Higher Education Defining and monitoring academic standards: A contentious discussion for the higher.
Developing Effective Signature Assignments: Lessons from the DQP Indiana Signature Assignment Workshop March 31, 2014 Ivy Tech Peter Ewell National Center.
Elizabeth Deane WIL symposium July One definition: The broad skills that a University expects that graduates will have acquired and be able to demonstrate.
The Role of the National Authority for Quality Assurance and Accreditation (NAQAAE) in Egyptian Education   The National Authority for Quality Assurance.
The Role of Assessment in Assuring Academic Quality Western Academic Leadership Forum April 25, 2013 Peter Ewell National Center for Higher Education Management.
Degree Profile Bringing new currency to the meaning of U.S. degrees February 2011.
Consistency of Assessment
1 GETTING STARTED WITH ASSESSMENT Barbara Pennipede Associate Director of Assessment Office of Planning, Assessment and Research Office of Planning, Assessment.
ACADEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Subject Benchmark Statements Programme Specifications Code of Practice (for the assurance.
Benchmarking Effective Educational Practice Community Colleges of the State University of New York April, 2005.
What’s driving the need for flexible curricula? How are our learners changing and what are their needs/expectations for flexible curricula? QAA Enhancement.
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European
Welcome to Teacher Education at ECU. Teacher Education Undergraduate programs lead to initial license in NC in 21 different teaching areas Director of.
Student Learning Outcomes: Tools for Intentionality.
National Frameworks of Qualifications, and the UK Experience Dr Robin Humphrey Director of Research Postgraduate Training Faculty of Humanities and Social.
Fifth Annual NSF Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program Conference July 7-9, 2010 Enrique Ortiz University of Central Florida Using a Teaching Goals.
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
“Three Cycle System in the Framework of Bologna Process”, Summer School, Yerevan, Armenia, 2008 European qualifications framework Algirdas Vaclovas Valiulis,
Emerging Multinational Initiatives in Tertiary Education SHEEO Higher Education Policy Conference August 13, 2010 Maureen McLaughlin.
Franklin University Dr. Lewis Chongwony, Instructional Designer
ECTS definition : Student centred system, Student centred system, Based on student workload required to : Based on student workload required to : Achieve.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT
Overall Teacher Judgements
Creating Entrepreneurship: entrepreneurship education for the creative industries David Clews Subject Centre Manager Higher Education Academy Art | Design.
Applying the Principles of Prior Learning Assessment Debra A. Dagavarian Diane Holtzman Dennis Fotia.
Pierce College CSUN-Pierce Paths Project Outcomes Report 2013.
Degree Profile Bringing new currency to the meaning of U.S. degrees January 2011.
Defining Quality Student learning and the Degree Qualifications Profile February 2012 Marcus Kolb, PhD Program Officer, Lumina Foundation.
Welcome The changing face of quality assurance Hilary Placito (Director of Quality and Academic Support) January 2013.
Using Electronic Portfolios to Assess Learning at IUPUI. Trudy Banta, et. al. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis 2007.
ENQA a key player in the European Higher Education Area Meeting of the Belarus University System representatives Minsk, March 2013 Josep Grifoll / Жузэп.
national qualification framework and the learning outcomes based education Petar Bezinović University of Rijeka and Institute for Social Research in Zagreb.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
Assessment of Student Learning North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Cia Verschelden June 17, 2009.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
Degree Profile Bringing new currency to the meaning of U.S. degrees August 2011.
PERSONNEL EVALUATION SYSTEMS How We Help Our Staff Become More Effective Margie Simineo – June, 2010.
Ann Campion Riley University of Missouri
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
Teresa K. Todd EDAD 684 School Finance/Ethics March 23, 2011.
What could we learn from learning outcomes assessment programs in the U.S public research universities? Samuel S. Peng Center for Educational Research.
Implementing an Ability Based Education System Colleen Keyes Dean of Academic Affairs Dr. David England Director of Institutional Effectiveness.
NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.
Origins and Development of the Lumina “Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP)” Peter Ewell National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS)
East Carolina University’s Conceptual Framework for Preparing Education Professionals.
Qualifications frameworks and qualifications standards Bryan Maguire Quality and Qualifications Ireland Conference on National Qualifications Framework.
PRESIDENT’S Campus forum November 9, Dr. Shirley Wagner and Dr. Paul Weizer NEASC Self Study Co-Chairs Key Elements of the Self Study Process Demystifying.
Continuous Improvement. Focus of the Review: Continuous Improvement The unit will engage in continuous improvement between on-site visits. Submit annual.
ANNOOR ISLAMIC SCHOOL AdvancEd Survey PURPOSE AND DIRECTION.
New Collaborative Practices in Aligning SCHE in Europe and the USA, two representative cases in Europe Golden Sands 15 June 2009 Ivelina Yoveva, IUC Bulgaria.
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat Le Secrétariat de la littératie et de la numératie October – octobre 2007 The School Effectiveness Framework A Collegial.
N ational Q ualifications F ramework N Q F Quality Center National Accreditation Committee.
October 20 – November 6, 2014 Alovidin Bakhovidinov Alina Batkayeva
THE SOLUTION TO OUR WOES? PRESENTATION BY DR. RICHARD LEIBY DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Competency-based Assessment.
February, MansourahProf. Nadia Badrawi Implementation of National Academic Reference Standards Prof. Nadia Badrawi Senior Member and former chairperson.
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat Le Secrétariat de la littératie et de la numératie October – octobre 2007 The School Effectiveness Framework A Collegial.
QCC General Education Assessment Task Force March 21 and 22, 2016 Faculty Forum on General Education Outcomes.
CDIO: Overview, Standards, and Processes (Part 2) Doris R. Brodeur, November 2005.
Denise Kirkpatrick Pro Vice-Chancellor The Open University, UK Quality Assurance in Distance Education.
MARTHA, NKECHINYERE AMADI (Ph.D)
AACSB’s Standard 9: Curriculum content
QM and Accreditation—Sounds Boring but It’s BASIC
Presented by: Skyline College SLOAC Committee Fall 2007
Shazna Buksh, School of Social Sciences
Student Learning Outcomes at CSUDH
Student Interpretation of Learning Outcomes
Presentation transcript:

The “Quality Agenda:” Implications for Assessment, Policy, and Professional Accreditation Peter T. Ewell National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) AACSB International Conference New Orleans, LA March 18, 2014

Logic of this Presentation The “Quality Agenda:” Where Did It Come From? The Historical Evolution of Discussions About Quality in Higher Education An Evolving “Standards” Movement in Higher Education o National: Degree Qualifications Frameworks with the U.S. DQP as an Example o Professional: Assessment in Business Programs Into the Future: A “Changing Ecology” for Accreditation and Its Implications for Assessing Quality

A Prominent “Completion Agenda” in Higher Education Policy Stimulated by Recognition of Link Between Economic and Social Benefits and Postsecondary Attainment in Many Countries Widespread National Attainment Goals (e.g. The Obama Goal in the U.S.: 60% of Young Adults with a Postsecondary Credential by 2020) But Concern that “Completion” Could Come at the Expense of Academic Quality

Hence, a Growing “Quality Agenda” New Interest in Aligned Student Learning Outcomes on a National and International Basis Shift of Attention from “Doing Assessment” to “Standards for Learning” Stakeholder Concern About Graduate Quality, Particularly from the Employment Community  So the Current Challenge is to Raise Completion Rates while Not Losing Academic Quality =

Changing Notions of “Quality” in Policy Discourse About Higher Education Largely taken for granted until the emergence of formal systems of “quality assurance” like accreditation and national Quality Assurance Agencies New conceptions of “quality” emerged gradually as colleges and universities diversified and became more complicated Today’s conception of “quality” is thus a sedimentary construction with new notions of what should count “layered in” on top of old ones

First Incarnation: Reputation Colleges for “The Quality” (who were members of a privileged elite or entering a professional class like the clergy, law, or medicine) “College” as a reserved term: distinct from postsecondary institutions: “institutes,” “normal schools,” etc. Alive and well on bumper stickers and big time sports teams [not to mention media rankings]

Second Incarnation: Resources U.S. Accreditation Criteria of the 1920s (North Central Association): “The college should: Enroll at least 200 students Should comprise at least eight departments with at least one person of professorial rank Should maintain a live, well-distributed library of at least 8000 volumes” Quantitative resource-based criteria like these officially a thing of the past…but stuff still matters a lot in popular views of “quality”

Third Incarnation: Selectivity The rise of admissions selectivity in the 1950s Reputation and exclusivity in a new guise: in the U.S., the role of the SAT was said to be to “uncover the hidden aristocracy of talent” An implied theory of education: smart begets smart by association and osmosis

Fourth Incarnation: “Fitness for Purpose” “Mission-based” quality review emerges as most appropriate for diverse postsecondary systems Peer review and institutional audit become the primary “assessment instruments” under this approach. “Purposes appropriate to an institution of higher education…” But what happened to standards?

Fifth Incarnation: Outcomes An “exo-skeletal” approach: outcomes assessment largely added on to the regular processes of teaching and learning. The resulting paradigm: Statements of intended learning outcomes Various ways to gather evidence of attainment Use of the resulting information to improve Embedded in U.S. regional accreditation standards by the mid-1990s and national QAA reviews by 2000

A Sixth Incarnation: Exit Proficiencies? A common set of graduation proficiencies adopted by all providers Assessments embedded in the regular teaching and learning process: Signature assignments in key classes Developed in common by teaching staff Graded or rated using standard rubrics Re-positioned proficiency-based transcripts that show “student learning as academic currency”

National Qualifications Frameworks  Matrix of Identified Proficiencies by Degree Levels  Purpose to Align and ‘“Moderate Academic Standards at Various Degree Levels  Some Examples:  Bologna Process Common Outcomes Benchmarks  QFs in UK, Australia, Ireland, Scotland, and Many Others  “Tuning” in Many Disciplines

Background to the DQP in the U.S.  Qualifications Frameworks in Many Other Countries (as Noted)  AAC&U LEAP Outcomes Statements and Rubrics  State-Level Outcomes Frameworks in U.S. (e.g. UT, WI, CSU, ND, VA)  Some Alignment of Cross-Cutting Abilities Statements Among Institutional Accreditors

What Does the DQP Look Like?  Three Degree Levels: Associate, Bachelor’s, and Master’s  Five Learning Areas: Specialized Knowledge, Broad/Integrative Knowledge, Intellectual Skills, Applied Learning, and Civic Learning  Framed as Successively Inclusive Hierarchies of “Action Verbs” to Describe Outcomes at Each Degree Level  Intended as a “Beta” Version, for Testing, Experimentation, and Further Development

An Example: Communication Skills Associate Level: The student presents substantially error-free prose in both argumentative and narrative forms to general and specialized audiences Bachelor’s Level: The student constructs sustained, coherent arguments and/or narratives and/or explications of technical issues and processes, in two media, to general and specialized audiences Master’s Level: The student creates sustained, coherent arguments or explanations and reflections on his or her work or that of collaborators (if applicable) in two or more media or languages, to both general and specialized audiences

Some Implications of the DQP The DQP Asserts that Every Student Should Graduate with the Designated Proficiencies. This Means that:  The Typical Approach of Setting Outcomes as “Aspirations” and Conducting Assessments of “Average” Student Performance is not Enough  Assessment as an “Add-On” to the Curriculum is Not Enough  Assessment Must Be Embedded in Regular Student Assignments and Examination Questions and Certified at Multiple Levels on the Way to Degree Completion

AACSB’s “Assurance of Learning”  Similar in Form and Intent to Assessment Requirements of Other Specialized Accreditors  Outcomes Set by Program Consistent with Mission  Both Generic and Field-Specific Outcomes  Methods Selected by Program and Not Standardized  Outside Consultation (e.g. with Employers) Encouraged  Use of Results Emphasized as Much as Assessment Process

Assessment in Business: NILOA Survey  Fourth of Twelve Schools or Departments with Respect to Overall Assessment Activity  Fifth of Twelve in Citing “Specialized Accreditation” as Reason for Doing Assessment  Second of Twelve in Using Capstone Courses  Second of Twelve in Reporting High Levels of Faculty Involvement in Assessment  Top School or Department Wanting Better Instruments

A Changing Ecology for Accreditation New Patterns of Student Participation New Kinds of Providers A Transformed and Contingent Faculty New Approaches to Instructional Provision Constrained Resources Most of These Forcing Learning Outcomes as the Only Practicable Way to Determine Quality

What are Accreditors Doing in Response? Look More Explicitly at: Coherence of Student Experience Across Settings How Faculty Roles are Constructed and Discharged “Outsourcing” of Courses and Teaching Response to Stakeholder Needs (e.g. Employers) Transparency and Public Reporting Use of Electronic Media and “Virtual Review”

Putting It All Together  New Discourse About “Quality” Centered on Standards for Learning that All Students Will Achieve  As Documented in an Identified Array of Proficiencies that Schools Adopt in Common  Reported Publicly to a Wide Array of Stakeholders  Review Techniques Transformed to Respond to New Ecology for Higher Education and New Modes of Provision