1. CIRTL Network Meeting October, 2013

2.  To guide program development and evaluation  To identify the purposes of specific programs to participants and others  To enable development of common evaluation items and instruments  To guide annual institutional program evaluations and evaluation of Cross-Network programs  To support discussion and documentation of the impact of CIRTL programs

3. CIRTL Outcomes ProgramsEvaluation

4.  Alignment between Outcomes, Programs, Evaluation  Learning Outcomes ◦ What will participants learn?  Programs ◦ Are institutional and cross-Network programs designed to help students achieve the CIRTL Learning Outcomes?  Evaluation ◦ What is the impact of participation in CIRTL programs on participants? ◦ To what extent do participants achieve the CIRTL Learning Outcomes?

5. Consider:  The stated outcomes on the website ◦ What has been said about what participants learn?  The Outcome Levels ◦ Fellow, Practitioner, Scholar ◦ How are the Outcome Levels described?  The Learning Community (LC) plans and IPs ◦ What outcomes have institutions mentioned?

6.  Institutional programs ◦ Not always systematically addressing all intended CIRTL Outcomes  The Outcomes (listed on the website) ◦ Not always progressive across the Levels ◦ Across institutions, some lack of consensus about the outcomes at each level

7. Focus on the Individual Participant  An individual has achieved a certain level of competency (F/P/S)  The level defines the set of competencies that an individual would develop to achieve a particular Level Focus on Programs  A program in service to helping an individual reach a level of competency  F/P/S can be used to indicate the focus of a program  Any single program would not necessarily address all competencies in the Level or fully prepare the individual in that competency

8.  What defines a Fellow, Practitioner, Scholar?  What are the boundaries between the concepts and skills/attitudes associated with each Level of Fellow, Practitioner, Scholar?  Should there be clear distinctions and specific outcomes at each Level, or should there be “blurry boundaries”?

9.  Are the Outcomes appropriate for the CIRTL mission?  Are the CIRTL Outcomes functional for the institutions? ◦ Are the outcomes sufficiently comprehensive in regard to the CIRTL mission? ◦ Should any be added, deleted, or refined? ◦ Are the outcomes progressive across the Outcome levels? ◦ Do the Outcomes appropriately define a Fellow, Practitioner, or Scholar?

10.  9:00 Whole Group ◦ Are the Outcomes appropriate for the mission?  9:20 Breakout Groups ◦ Detailed analysis of the Outcomes  10:30 Report Backs and Discussion ◦ Are the Outcomes functional for the institutions? ◦ Are adjustments needed?

11.  The CIRTL mission is to enhance excellence in undergraduate education through the development of a national faculty committed to implementing and advancing effective teaching practices for diverse learners as part of successful and varied professional careers.

12.  Six groups ◦ TAR/ Teaching ◦ Learning through Diversity ◦ Learning Community  See Handout for specific instructions  Select Recorder/ Reporter

13.  The CIRTL mission is to enhance excellence in undergraduate education through the development of a national faculty committed to implementing and advancing effective teaching practices for diverse learners as part of successful and varied professional careers.

14.  What adjustments may be needed in the CIRTL Learning Outcomes? ◦ Small Group Reports ◦ Whole Group Discussion

15.  What are appropriate boundaries of CIRTL Learning Outcomes and boundaries of CIRTL?