Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (15)
Similar to Seminar
Similar to Seminar (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Seminar
- 1. NAMETAGS
- 2. Using Student Engagement As A Lens for Course Evaluation
- 3. Participants should be able to: Remember and understand student engagement, NSSE / CLASSE, course evaluation,EBP Design data collection procedures for gauging student engagement. Interpret the data Take appropriate actions
- 4. Outline Pre-assessment Course evaluation Student engagement Examples Post assessment
- 5. Pre-assessment Define: student engagement, NSSE, CLASSE , course evaluation, evidence-based practice. Explain how you would assess student engagement in your course. Evaluate the course featured in the data on pages 8 – 10 in the handouts. Suggest changes to your course that would enhance student engagement.
- 6. Course Evaluation Evaluators’ perspective: A judgment about the worth or merit of something
- 7. Course Evaluation at the U of C USRI: Syllabus contained sufficient detail? Course was consistent with syllabus? Course content was well organized? Instructor was responsive? Treated students with respect? Evaluation methods were fair? Identify merit. Identify criteria and standards. Collect data. Make judgment. Take action.
- 10. Course Evaluation Instructors’ perspective
- 11. Student Engagement as Merit? The extent to which students participate in activities with established correlations to deep and meaningful learning Active and collaborative learning Student to faculty contact Academic challenge Enriching educational activities Supportive campus environment
- 12. Student Engagement Correlates GPA Persistence Academic development Knowledge acquisition Analytical and problem solving skills Self-esteem Deep learning General education Personal development Practical competence
- 13. Measuring Student Engagement National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
- 15. Problems with NSSE for Course Evaluation? Purely descriptive: Now what? General: Blame is diffuse Interpretability of data: “quite a bit?” “rarely?” Imposed “Supportive campus environment?” “Enriching educational activities?”
- 16. From NSSE to CLASSE Purely descriptive: Explanatory General: Local “Quite a bit?” “rarely:” 0, 1-2, 3-4, 5 or more Imposed: Voluntary
- 17. Course Evaluation With the CLASSE Identify merit: Student engagement Identify criteria: active, collaborative, challenging Set standards: norms, pre-post, Collect data: CLASSE Make judgments: Compare data with standards Revise course:
- 18. Student Engagement and Narrative Pedagogy
- 19. Aggregate student engagement by course.n= 39, 44. Mean rank = 30.23, 52.43, Mann-Whitney U = 399,p< 0.01.
- 20. Engagement Activities subscale. Mean rank = 33.94, 55.61, Mann-Whitney U = 522.5, p < 0.001.
- 21. Other educational practices subscale. Mean rank = 38.55, 54.27, Mann-Whitney U = 711.50, p = 0.05.
- 22. Cognitive skills subscale: Mean rank = 43.91, 53.59. Mann-Whitney U = 939, p > 0.05.
- 23. Class atmosphere subscale. n= 45, 47, Mean rank = 51.94, 41.29, Mann-Whitney U = 812.500, p > 0.05.
- 24. Student Engagement and Study Abroad
- 25. Student Engagement and Study Abroad: Higher Order Learning Items
- 26. Student Engagement and Study Abroad: Reflective Learning Items
- 27. Student Engagement and Study Abroad: General Education Items
- 28. Evaluate Your Course For Engagement (In pairs) select / revise items from the CLASSE to evaluate your course. Set standards. Interpret the data. Revise the course to enhance engagement.
- 29. Post assessment Define: student engagement, NSSE, CLASSE , course evaluation, evidence-based practice. Explain how you would assess student engagement in your course. Suggest changes to your course that would enhance student engagement.
Editor's Notes
- Ok, this seminar is about student engagement and course evaluation so let me give a brief introduction to these two topics. Student: Over the last five years or so, student engagement has become an increasingly important issue for academic units such as the University of Alberta’s Centre of Teaching and Learning, for two reasons. One, a few years ago Macleans magazine started including student engagement as one of the criteria it uses to rank universities, so for better or worse, student engagement becomes an important metric for many of higher education’s stakeholders—student who are making decisions about which school to apply to, and their parents, boards of governors, who need to respond to criticisms of their institution, and so on). And second, it turns out that student engagement is not such a bad metric for gauging the quality of students’ educational experiences at university. Student engagement is a construct that has face validity with instructors: teachers of all educational levels pepper their discussion with talk of engaged students; it is a construct that emerges from several decades of good research in higher education, and, importantly, it comes with psychometrically sound measurement tools. So, of the processes or metrics that we use to gauge the quality of higher education, student engagement turns out to be pretty good one.Course EvaluationCourse evaluation is also an important issue for faculty development centres and universities. Much more tangible and concrete than the quality of a university is the quality of the course that I am teaching as a prof or taking as a student. These are the issues I’m concerned about, and importantly, they are the ones I can affect. Unfortunately the processes through which we evaluate courses are unlikely to provide insight into what’s working and what isn’t, and importantly, to lead to improvements. An end of course questionnaire that solicits self-report satisfaction data through closed-ended items, which is neither based in a theory of teaching and learning in higher education or tailored to my course are typically examples of evaluation theatre. In the seminar, I’m going to argue that student engagement is a good lens for evaluating courses, I’m going to provides some examples of how that is being done, and we going to work through an example. Advance the mission of the university. Argue that student engagement could provide the model of teaching and learning in higher education that is missing from course evaluation tools, and that the NSSE could provide the psychometrically sound instrument. That advances an important institutional mandate. By doing so, we could enhance course evaluation such that courses could be improved, and enhance student engagement at the university , because, administering the nsseeveyr two to four years doesn’t do that.
- There ways three ways to view course evaluation. An obvious way is from the perspective of an evaluator. Another way is from the perspective of someone who works at a university, say as a professor, a departmental Chair, or a Dean. The third way is from the perspective of a student in a course. (grab evaluations from rate my prof. com. Talk about satisfaction.) Let me begin by with an evaluator’s perspective. A casual definition of evaluation is: a judgment about the worth or merit or something. In this case it is about the merit of a course. Here’s a fuller definition: Evaluation is the identification of criteria and standards for determining the merit of an evaluand, and the systematic collection of data to support that determinationEveryone has their own understanding of “evaluation”
- What we want to do is 1) identify some criteria and standards for determining the merit of the course. 2) Systematically collect data to make that determination. Here is the U of C’s approach examined through that lens:1. Merit? Instructivism / content-centred / behaviorism / banking approach / bureaucratic / Instructional systems design approach to military training. What model of teaching and learning in higher education are these questions derived from? How many dimensions are represented here? What is the reliability and validity (content, criterion, construct)? 2. Criteria: detailed syllabus, course-syllabus alignment, organization, responsiveness, respect, student assessment. 2b. Standards: 3. Collect data: self-report of satisfaction? If you were a social science researcher, and you wanted to determine the answer to these questions, what would you do? Have colleagues or instructional designers determine the sufficiency of the detail; what does the student know? You would have the same types of people conduct classroom observations, etc… Obviously, this is an imperfect process, and it might account for some of the problems that materialize. Return to the evaluation perspective: So what we want to do is 1) identify some criteria and standards for determining the merit of the course. 2) Systematically collect data to make that determination.
- Course Evaluation: Students’ perspective
- For instructors, is the main purpose of the course evaluation to make a judgment about the merit of the course? The basic fact of the course evaluations is their role in the performance evaluation. One time I was evaluating a short term study abroad program that involved an archeology professor and his wife leading a group of 15 students through Mexico and three, half-credit courses. The trip went badly, there was much traveler’s diahrea, much acrimony toward the prof but this didn’t come out in the course evaluations that were conducted during drinks at a pub in Mexico City. (Nor did the students’ favorable evaluations align with the data we collected on student learning).The point: Difficult for the data collected in this manner, and the interpretations to lead to improvements in the course; and “improvements” are constrained to student satisfaction with the level of detail provided in the syllabus and the course’s alignment with it. Nurses invited me over initally because of the terrorizing by students during evaluation, and many confess to me that they don’t read their evaluation.
- What counts as merit? The conventional answer is: Are students satisfied? Perhaps a more reasonable answer is “students achieve the learning outcomes of the course.” A third approach is presented by the CLASSE, and the general form of that answer is: the course embodies the principles of high quality instruction, and the specific answer for the CLASSE, to the question of what counts as merit, is “student engagement.”
- N items, n institutions in Canada, n years, Consolidation of the 7 principles of Effective Instruction