Transcript of "Keeping the Ball Rolling: Developing a System that Supports Real Progress in Assessing Student Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate and Graduate Programs and Student Services "
INNOVATION IN STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT APPLICATION FOR MINI-GRANTS Deadline for submission of applications for Mini-Grants March 1, 2012 at 5 p.m.GENERAL INFORMATIONThe Advancement of Student Learning Council (ASLC), with the support of the Office of InstitutionalEffectiveness, is pleased to make available financial resources to assist faculty with activities associatedwith student learning outcomes assessment. The goal of the mini-grant is to provide fundingopportunities to faculty to assist with new development of sound learning outcomes assessment practicesat the program-level, encourage professional development associated with program-level outcomesassessment, and to strengthen the infrastructure for the scholarship of teaching and learning. Mini-Grant: Awards up to $5,000. The purpose of a mini-grant is to provide start-up funds for a new initiative directly related to the program’s outcomes assessment plan. Innovation in learning outcomes assessment is an important aspect of building a culture that uses evidence to shape decision making and curriculum development. Recipients may be asked to present their findings at Pepperdine and at the WASC Academic Resource Conference in April 2013. Award recipients are encouraged to pursue publication in one of the many teaching and learning journals. In addition, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness should be considered as an analytic resource during the course of the project. Please note: innovation is a key aspect of this grant. The ASLC is would like to support and encourage new project development to enhance the assessment of student learning outcomes.PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONThe application must be typed, dated and sent to the ASLC via email attachment to firstname.lastname@example.org the due date. Initiatives with funds from other sources are ineligible for the mini-grant. Faculty whohold senior administrative roles (e.g., associate dean or higher) are also ineligible for funds.ELIGIBILITYFaculty who are involved with the development and implementation of program-outcomes assessmentactivities are welcome to apply for support from the ASLC.APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONSApplicants must show clearly the relationship of the proposed activity to the intended programassessment plan and must show how the information gained will advance student academicoutcomes assessment for the program. Please limit applications to two pages (single spaced).I. APPLICATION COVER PAGEII. PROPOSAL CRITERIA A. Purpose: a. Explain the proposed project/activity and its importance to the program’s assessment plan. b. Indicate the anticipated outcomes of the project. B. Methodology and Relevance to the Advancement of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment: a. Describe the project. Identify pertinent model(s) of inquiry, materials and procedures to be used, and variables to be studied; explain how completion of the project will enhance
academic outcomes assessment for the program. b. Include how the project fits in with the current program learning outcomes, curriculum map, and assessment plan. Particular attention will be given to proposals that are also tied to the university student learning outcomes. C. Timeline: Indicate the anticipated dates for beginning and completing this project. Specify any deadline dates of which the council should be cognizant as it considers your proposal.III. PROPOSAL EVALUATION Mini-Grant The council will focus support on a new initiative directly related to program-level student learning outcomes assessment. Typically, funded projects will be those that are highlighted in the unit’s assessment plan. Please refer to Appendix A for the rubric used to evaluate mini-grant submissions. Submissions with the highest total points will be awarded the funds, although a minimum of 80 points total is required to contend. The number of awards granted may vary, depending on available resources.IV. FUNDING 1. Upon approval of the ASLC, the recipient will be awarded the funds in September 2012. 2. Recipient must submit a brief summary of their completed assessment project to the ASLC. The summary should note the direct and indirect benefits to the program assessment. To provide an opportunity for the university community to become better acquainted with the kind and quality of assessment projects supported by the committee, recipients must be willing to present the results of their work at an assessment related university event. 3. ASLC support should be acknowledged in all publications and presentations resulting from this grant.
INNOVATION IN STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT MINI-GRANT APPLICATIONI. APPLICATION COVER PAGEName of Applicant(s) (List Project Director first)____________________________________________________________________________Title of Proposal ______________________________________________________________Department(s) ________________________________________________________________Campus Mailing Address ________________________________________________________E-mail Address _________________________________ Campus Phone _________________Starting Date (M/Y): _____/______, Ending Date: (M/Y): _____/______II. PROPOSAL OUTLINE A. Purpose B. Methodology and Relevance to the Advancement of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment C. Timeline
Appendix A Innovation in Student Learning Outcomes Assessment: Mini-Grant Assessment Rubric Rating Project Purpose Scholarly Literature Methodology Innovation and Contribution Project’s aims are clearly An integrated understanding The methodology is The uniqueness of the Exemplary defined. How the PROGRAM of the scholarly literature appropriate for addressing the project’s contribution for benefits from engaging in the related to the project aims and is explicitly assessing student learning is (25 pts) proposed assessment practices discipline/profession, spelled out, e.g., the model of supported with evidence from is addressed and direct pedagogy, and best inquiry is specified and benchmarking against other evidence that precipitated the assessment practices is justified, variables are institutions or other methods decision to engage in the presented to support the identified, the materials and that demonstrate new proposed project is included in proposed project. References procedures (including sampling development. the discussion. Also addressed list is provided. procedures) are described, and is how the proposed project data analysis strategies are provides evidence to support delineated. A detailed timeline the university IEOs. for completion is provided. Project aims are defined, Although literature relevant The methodology is The rationale for new Acceptable although lack specificity. How to the proposed project is appropriate for addressing the development makes intuitive the PROGRAM benefits from reviewed, there is a lack of an project aims but details sense but lacks supporting (20 pts) engaging in the proposed integrated understanding of regarding the model of inquiry, evidence from benchmarking assessment practices is the scholarly literature related variables, materials and or other methods that addressed and indirect to the discipline/profession, procedures, and data analysis demonstrate uniqueness. evidence is offered to explain pedagogy, and best strategies are missing. A the need for the proposed assessment practices. timeline for completion is project. How the proposed References list is provided. provided, although the steps project provides evidence to toward completion are vague. support the university IEOs is vague. Project aims are ill-defined. Scholarly literature is of The methodology is The proposed project isUnacceptable How the PROGRAM benefits limited scope and does not incongruent with the aims of nothing more than acting on from engaging in the proposed provide adequate support for the proposed study and/or is what is the standard of (10 pts) assessment practices is only the proposed project. ill-defined. A timeline may not practice in higher education, superficially addressed and no exist or if one does exist, the i.e., requests to develop evidence is offered to explain steps toward completion are program SLOs, curriculum the need for the proposed unspecified. map, and/or assessment plan. project. There is no discussion of how the proposed project provides evidence to support the university IEOs.