Research Proposal Presentation Nadia Paola Mireles Torres University of Calgary GDER 700 A & 700 B Dr. T. Armstrong Winter, 2010

1. “the impact of learning outcomes assessment on accreditation systems in latinamerica” Nadia Paola Mireles Torres University of Calgary GDER 700 A & 700 B Dr. T. Armstrong Winter, 2010

2. Background Globalization - Global forces - ICT, Knowledge society, global market New challenges Global market More competitive graduates: new role of HE New skills and competencies Quality Assurance Increased attention Important global trend

3. Quality Assurance (QA) Dimensions QA for accountability – quantity focus QA for improvement – quality focus Mechanisms for QA Evaluation Assessment Accreditation

4. Accreditation Most common approach to measure QA Accreditation focus turned indicators from quantity inputs to quality outcomes New challenge: the development of evidence and assessment of student learning outcomes (J. S. Eaton, 2002).

5. Learning outcomes (LO) Accreditation has gradually shifted from encouraging to requiring LO. Kuh & Ikenberry (2009) Who?: USA (CHEA) Award for Institutional Progress in Student LO EU (Tuning) Australia OECD (AHELO)

6. Literature review Quality assurance approaches QA for improvement Accreditation Current status Trends to LO assessment Impact in accreditation criteria Case: USA / CHEA (award) Cases: Mexico, Argentina, RIACES Developed countries Latin America … ???

7. Globalization New skills Increase in HE Trend on QA For accountability For improvement Approaches Accreditation LO assesment Incorporate LO in accreditation Developed countries ?? ?? Latin America Accreditation An interpretation of the future impact that LO assessment will have in accreditation systems of Latin America

8. Researchquestion How is the trend to assess LO in other countries impacting accreditation in Latin America? How was the process to integrate the assessment of LO in the criteria and certification processes of accreditation agencies in the USA? To what extent the CHEA award has influenced institutions in the USA to start assessing LO? Accreditation is a transferred process. How is the LO assessment going to be transferred to Latin American accreditation systems?

9. Studies that have addressed the problem Relatedtoaccreditation and thetrendtofocus in LO: Brittingham, 2009; Christy, McNeal, & Lewis, 2002; Mori, 2009; Beno, 2004; Volkwein et al., 2006; Whittlesey, 2005 Related to HEIs experiences on LO assessment: Anagnos, 2008; Bresciani, 2009; Coates, 2009; Peach, Brian E.; Mukherjee, Arup & Hornyak, Martin; 2007; Schaeper; 2009; Stivers; Bonnie & Phillips, Jeffrey; 2009

10. Studies that have addressed the problem. Whittlesey’s (2005): Criteria used by some accreditation agencies to determine to what extent the LO assessment is incorporated in their certification processes Volkwein et al. (2006): Impact of accreditation on LO experiences of 40 HEIs. Nusche (2008): Analyzed different instruments used to assess LO in different countries AHELO feasibilitystudy (2011): Assess LO in different HEIs around the world with a unique instrument

11. Studies that have addressed the problem. LO assessment is uncommon in Latin America (either in HEIs or in accreditation agencies) Few or no studies addressing the LO assessment in LA (Nuñez, 2008): compared the LO assessment in different years. Mentions one specific accreditation agency to be including the LO assessment in its certification criteria Studies related to accreditation do not contemplate very deeply the LO assessment

12. Researchframework Interpretivism “is an attempt to understand and explain human and social reality… looks for culturally and historically situated interpretations of the social life-world”. This study seeks to: Understand evolution of QA in a specific country Explain how the trend to QA for improvement (LO assessment) impacted accreditation Interpret how this trend will make an impact in an accreditation system that yet does not completely focus on QA for improvement

13. Methodology Case study: “the researcher explores in depth a program, an event, an activity, a process, or individuals” Creswell (2003) Type of case study: Historical organizational Multisites “The more that your question seek to explain how or why some phenomenon works, the more case study will be relevant” Yin (2008)

14. Prcedure for Data Collection Interviews and document analysis Interviews with accreditation agencies' authorities in: USA, Mexico, Argentina and RIACES CHEA case: Review of documents and records regarding the implementation of LO assessment in certification criteria

15. Data analysis The case study “is designed to elicit discussion and analysis of a particular situation… based on their analyses, students can make predictions about future events”. Naumes & Naumes (2006)

16. Reliability of the study CHEA case: leader in requiring HEIs so to include the assessment of LO in their practices. Mexican case: only OECD Latin country that will participate in the AHELO study Argentinean case: Latin-American accreditation agency requiring a proof of LO assessment in its certification criteria RIACES as a general Latin American case: to predict how accreditation in Latin America may gradually focus on the assessment of LO.

17. Limitations Interpretations may not be completely accurate Quality assurance faces other challenges that may not be contemplated in this study and may affect the interpretations Hard to get the whole Latin perspective by researching only two countries as case studies Lack of experience of the author in the accreditation field may be a limitation to understand critical issues Language/databases, context/studies

18. Anticipation of results Willthereactuallybeanimpact? I dontreallyknow Very new topic Maybe a copyoradaptationfrom? USA EU Veryslow pace International accreditation – more importantthaninclusion of LO assesment

19. References Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2006). Visión panorámica de la internacionalización en la educación superior: motivaciones y realidades.PerfilesEducativos, XXVIII, pp. 13-39. Beno, B. A. (2004). The role of student learning outcomes in accreditation quality review. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2004(126), 65-72. Brittingham, B. (2009). Accreditation in the United States: How did we get to where we are?New DirectionsforHigherEducation, (145), 7-27. Brunner, J. J. (2000). Globalización y el futuro de la educación: Tendencias, desafíos, estrategias. Seminario sobre Prospectiva de la Educación en la Región de América Latina y el Caribe. Carot, J. M. (2010). Debate semanal del Portal Enlaces.Retrieved 3/22/2010, 2010, from http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1565:&Itemid=494&lang=es&limitstart=3 Christy, W. K., McNeal, L., & Lewis, R. (2002). Accreditation: New directions and new reports. Coates, H. (2009). What's the difference? A model for measuring the value added by higher education in Australia. Higher Education Management & Policy, 21(1), 77-95. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. de Wit, H., Jaramillo, C., & Knight, J. (2005). Higher education in Latin America: The international dimension. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. de Wit, H., & Knight, J. (1999). Quality and internationalisation in higher education. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education. Diaz Barriga, Á. (2009). La acreditación de programas (planes de estudio). Entre el formalismo y los procesos educativos. RISEU DidouAupetit, S. (2006). Internacionalización de la educación superior: entre el entusiasmo y el desencanto.PerfilesEducativos, XXVIII, pp. 56-70. Eaton, J. S. (2002). Assuring quality and accountability in postsecondary education: Assessing the role of accreditation. Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Eaton, J. S. (2008). ATTENDING to student learning. Change, 40(4), 22. Eaton, J. S. (2009). Accreditation in the United States. New Directions for Higher Education, (145), 79-86. European Commission. TUNING educational structures in Europe. Retrieved 3/22/2010, 2010, from http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/ Gazzola, A. L., & Pires, S. (2008). Hacia una política regional de aseguramiento de la calidad en educación superior para América Latina y el Caribe. Venezuela: IESALC-UNESCO. Global University Network forInnovation. (2007). La educación superior en el mundo 2007. acreditación para la garantía de la calidad: ¿Que está en juego?. Madrid: Mundiprensa. Kehm, B. M., & Teichler, U. (2007). Research on internationalisation in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3-4), 260-273.

20. References Kristoffersen, D. (2010). Advice on learning outcomes resarch. Kuh, G., & Ikenberry, S. (2009). More than you think, less than we need: Learning outcomes assessment in American higher education. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Lamarra, N. F. (2003). Higher education, quality evaluation and accreditation in latinamerica and MERCOSUR. European Journal of Education, 38(3), 253. Liu, O. L. (2009). Measuring learning outcomes in higher education No. RDC-10) EducationalTestingService. LopezSegrera, F. (2003). El impacto de la globalización y las políticas educativas en los sistemas de educación superior de América Latina y el Caribe. Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO. López Segrera, F., Brock, C., & DiasSobrinho, J. (2009). Higher education in Latin American and the Caribbean 2008. Venezuela: IESALC-UNESCO. Marijk van, d. W. (2007). Internationalization of higher education in the OECD countries: Challenges and opportunities for the coming decade. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3), 274-289. McMillan, J. H. (2008). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer Pearson/Allyn and Bacon. Mori, R. (2009). Accreditation systems in Japan and the United States: A comparative perspective on governmental involvement. New Directions for Higher Education, (145), 69-77. Naumes, W., & Naumes, M. J. (2006). Art and craft of case writing. M.E. Sharpe. Nuñez, A. M. (2008). Evaluación de los niveles de adquisición e integración de conceptos y competencias en ciencias básicas en la Universidad de Mendoza. Universidad de Granada). Nusche, D. (2008). Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: A comparative review of selected practices OECD, Directorate for Education. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD feasibility study for the international assessment of higher education learning outcomes (AHELO). Retrieved 3/22/2010, 2010, from http://www.oecd.org/document/22/0,3343,en_2649_35961291_40624662_1_1_1_1,00.html Santiago, P., & Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society. Paris: OECD. Volkwein, J. F., Lattuca, L. R., Harper, B. J., & Domingo, R. J. (2006). Getting in sync: The impact of accreditation on student experiences and learning outcomes. Chicago: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research. Whittlesey, V. (2005). Student learning outcomes assessment and the disciplinary accrediting organizations. Assessment Update, 17(4), 10-12. World Bank. (2002). Constructing knowledge societies. World Bank. Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.)