Multi-State Collaborative 1

 Susan Albertine Vice President, Office of Diversity, Equity, and Student Success, AAC&U Faculty Engagement Subgroup, MSC  James Gubbins Associate Professor - Salem State University, Massachusetts Faculty Engagement Subgroup, MSC 2

 It is good for student learning.  It supports faculty engagement.  It strengthens programs.  It connects assessment to teaching and learning. 3

 January 2010: Working group begins process of developing a statewide system for assessing student learning outcomes  October 2012: Statewide conference on Quantitative Literacy  Spring 2013: First pilot study to test a model for statewide assessment. The three learning outcomes: Critical Thinking, Quantitative Literacy, and Written Communication 4

 Spring 2013 Massachusetts Pilot Study: Lessons learned Faculty scorer: “I spent almost a whole day scoring the quantitative literacy artifacts. It did not go well for multiple reasons... many of the artifact[s] weren't appropriate for this rubric (they were simple math quizzes).”  Fall 2014 Multistate Collaborative Pilot Study: Benefits from Massachusetts’s experience 5

6  K-16 Teachers and administrators in Massachusetts have devised a working definition of college readiness in Mathematics  Quantitative Literacy VALUE Rubric has offered Massachusetts faculty a starting point for understanding, discussing, and assessing college-level quantitative literacy

7 Criteria Performance Descriptors Levels

8

9

 Second Criterion in the Quantitative Literacy Rubric: Representation ◦ Ability to convert relevant information into various mathematical forms (e.g., equations, graphs, diagrams, tables, words)  Third Criterion in the Quantitative Literacy Rubric: Calculation 10

11

12

13

14 Criteria Performance Descriptors Levels

15

16

 Know where you want to go: What is the key outcome you want?  Consider how you might tweak an existing assignment to include that key outcome.  Consider how an assignment might contribute to a student’s grasp of the defined learning outcome over time ◦ Analyze QL criteria to determine key components for a QL assignment in your field. ◦ Work backwards from a student artifact, preferably in a group, using the VALUE QL rubric; consider the DQP for reference.  Assignments themselves may be arranged progressively or scaffolded across a course and through a program. ◦ What activities can you identify to improve critical thinking and integrative learning? ◦ Can the assignment be used for more than one outcome? ◦ How can you help students gain QL capacity over time in your disciplinary context?  What are the types of assignments that will be most helpful for allowing students to demonstrate competency and help them get ready for the days after graduation? 17

 Collaborate  Think structurally  Plan beyond your discipline  Cultivate novice thinking  Ask students to talk about how they are learning 18

19  Assignment Design Webinar May 13, 4-5pm (ET) and May 14, 4-5pm (ET)  Sampling for the Pilot Study May 21, 4-5pm (ET) and May 22, 4-5pm (ET)  Multi-State Assessment: IRB & Student Consent May 28, 5-6pm (ET) and June 3, 4-5pm (ET)  Coding, Formatting, Submitting: Using Taskstream Date and Time TBD Webinars will be recorded and posted to: Webinars already posted:  Welcome to the MSC Questions?  Pilot Study Overview Additional MSC Webinars