Plan for the Assessment of General Education at the University at Buffalo

Transcription

1 Plan for the Assessment of General Education at the University at Buffalo Submitted to the General Education Assessment Review (GEAR) Group By Satish Tripathi, Ph.D. Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs University at Buffalo February 2005

2 Table of Contents Background... 1 UB s Undergraduate Educational Mission... 1 General Education at UB... 2 Assessment Framework... 2 Methodology... 3 Faculty Development... 4 Continuous Review and Improvement... 4 Assessment Schedule... 5 Efforts to date: Logistics and Pilot Results... 5 Communication, Dissemination, and Program Improvement... 7 Compliance of Plan with GEAR Criteria... 8 Conclusion Endnotes Appendix I: Mapping of UB General Education Requirements to SUNY Outcomes Appendix II: UB Courses Approved by SUNY for Fulfillment of General Education Appendix III: Pilot Test of UB s Assessment Process Aggregate Assessment Results for Piloted Outcomes Social Sciences: Sample Assessment Measure Economics Natural Sciences: Sample Assessment Measure Biology Western and Other World Civilizations: Sample Assessment Measure World Civilizations I-II Appendix IV: UB Assessment Documents, Forms, and Samples Assessment Pamphlet for Faculty Course Pre-Assessment Submission Information Handout on Course-Embedded Assessment Activities Pre-Assessment Submission Form: Natural Sciences Example Inter-Rater Reliability Report: Oral Communication Example Course Assessment Reporting Form: Social Sciences Example Sample Rubric: Natural Science Experiment Sample Rubric: Social Science Final Exam Items Sample Rubric: Oral Presentation Sample Rubric: Rhetorical Criticism... 39

3 Plan for the Assessment of General Education at the University at Buffalo Background After a 1998 vote by the SUNY Board of Trustees to institute a core General Education curriculum SUNY-wide, Provost Peter D. Salins formed a task force to address assessment of the new core curriculum. Specifically, the Provost s Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes was charged to: Examine and discuss the issues involved in implementing undergraduate student learning outcomes assessment today specifically, in the context of a large and diverse university system such as the State University of New York, and to make recommendations regarding: A process for assessing student learning outcomes and intellectual growth in General Education and the Major that will provide the faculty and academic leadership with an important and effective way of improving the quality of undergraduate education, and the University with a coherent and meaningful longitudinal data base with which to be accountable to its stakeholders. 1 The Task Force s report outlined learning outcomes for ten knowledge and skill areas and two competencies to be included in all campus General Education Programs. 2 The General Education Assessment Review (GEAR) Group was formed jointly by the University Faculty Senate, the Faculty Council of Community Colleges, and SUNY System Administration to oversee implementation of the assessment process. By Fall 2001, the GEAR Group issued guidelines 3 for the submission of General Education assessment plans from the various SUNY campuses. The Group continues to oversee campus-based assessment plans and is charged with reviewing those plans biennially. The University at Buffalo is pleased to offer to GEAR this updated plan for assessment of its General Education program. After an initial review of UB s educational mission and brief summary of the General Education program, the current document lays out the general assessment framework to be followed, offers a schedule for implementation, discusses logistical considerations, and describes a process for continuous quality improvement in General Education on the basis of assessment results. Finally, each of the GEAR criteria for plan approval is discussed in turn. Supporting documentation can be found in the appendices. UB s Undergraduate Educational Mission UB began as a private medical college in 1846, later adding Pharmacy (1886), Law (1887), and Dental Medicine (1892). It was not until 1913 that the College of Arts and Sciences was formed and UB became a full university, finally joining the SUNY system in To date, UB remains the largest and most comprehensive university in the SUNY system and enjoys recognition as a premier research institution. UB s history and commitment to professional and postbaccalaureate education significantly influences its approach to undergraduate education. The University offers over 100 bachelor s 1

4 programs, in addition to granting a wide range of professional and graduate degrees. Undergraduate education at UB strongly emphasizes preparation for advanced study beyond the bachelor s degree and encourages students to pursue undergraduate research opportunities. As such, UB maintains high standards in its programs, and its General Education program reflects the advanced faculty expectations for its undergraduates. General Education at UB General Education at UB focuses on depth of knowledge in addition to breadth. UB s Faculty Senate worked with the College of Arts and Sciences and UB administrators to more closely align the UB General Education program with SUNY learning objectives. The result was a General Education program consistent with SUNY System Administration goals, but one which maintained the advanced level and depth expected by UB s faculty. UB undergraduates must complete General Education coursework in Mathematics, Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, Arts, Writing, Western and World Civilizations, American Pluralism/American History, and uages. Three additional areas are designed to be infused within the student s General Education experience, namely Oral Communication, Information Management (Library Skills / Information Competency), and Critical Thinking. Finally, an additional component of UB s General Education program is the depth requirement, which requires students to select an additional advanced-level course in one of several General Education knowledge areas. Appendix I provides a mapping of UB General Education requirements to the SUNY learning outcomes. Assessment Framework UB s General Education offerings are monitored by an Office of General Education in the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS). Courses meeting the General Education requirements are dispersed throughout UB s many departments and schools. As a result, much of the responsibility for course content resides within individual departments and with the faculty assigned to teach those courses. In consultation with the Faculty Senate and CAS, the Provost approves courses meeting General Education requirements following guidelines set out by SUNY 4 and subject to SUNY oversight. Appendix II lists UB courses currently approved by SUNY for meeting various General Education requirements. Key Plan Components Course-embedded activities for assessment Discipline-Based Review Panels Aggregate reporting of results Technical assistance and support Continuous improvement process Programmatic changes integrated with existing faculty governance Two Faculty Senate committees are charged with overseeing UB s General Education program and its assessment. The Academic Planning Committee has primary oversight responsibility for General Education and is charged to continually review and recommend changes, as necessary, in the general education and general education assessment policies of the University. 5 The Educational Programs and Policy Committee plays an additional, supportive role and is charged to work in close conjunction with the Academic Planning Committee in evaluating the general education program and assessment programs mandated by the state university for the school. 6 2

5 As such, a structural foundation for assessment oversight already exists within UB s Faculty Senate. Moreover, to facilitate Faculty Senate oversight and review, we propose creation of several Discipline-Based Review Panels to monitor and oversee the assessment process in specific disciplinary areas and to make improvement recommendations on the basis of assessment results. Such review panels, composed of knowledgeable faculty in the respective discipline, are in the best position to evaluate assessment practices, judge the validity of methods, and make suggestions for improvement of outcomes on relevant learning outcomes. Each panel would correspond to one or more SUNY learning outcomes, as follows: Mathematics Natural Sciences Social Sciences Western and World Civilizations American Pluralism/American History Arts and Humanities uage Written Communication Oral Communication Information Management and Library Skills Critical Thinking and Reasoning Each panel shall consist of faculty members with expertise in the respective disciplinary area. The duties of each panel shall include: Periodic review of courses and recommendations regarding approval for General Education credit Approval of course-based assessment methods, evaluated against GEAR guidelines Submission of aggregated assessment results for inclusion in UB s annual assessment report to SUNY Review of assessment results and the assessment process on a three-year cycle with recommendations for purposes of continuous improvement, with the Panel s report delivered to the relevant Faculty Senate Committees, the Associate Dean for General Education (CAS), and the Director for Assessment The Director for Assessment will coordinate the activities of the Discipline-Based Review Panels and assist them in meeting their duties, particularly with the filing of any reports and the dissemination of any recommendations to the appropriate parties, including UB s Academic Planning Committee and the Educational Programs and Policy Committee. Methodology With the possible exceptions of Critical Thinking, Mathematics, and Writing (outcomes for which assessment guidelines are currently being redrafted by GEAR), assessment of all SUNYspecified learning outcomes will be classroom-based. Individual instructors, responsible for their 3

6 own course content, will be asked to identify one or more course-embedded activities to be used for assessment. The instructor will provide a priori scoring criteria, including decision rules for classifying students into the desired SUNY performance categories: Exceeds, Meets, Approaches, or Does Not Meet the relevant outcome. In the event that subjective (rather than objective) assessment is used, the instructor must provide a rubric and evidence of its inter-rater reliability, as required by GEAR guidelines. In all cases, the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel will be responsible for ensuring that assessment procedures submitted by instructors uniquely address each distinct learning outcome, demonstrate reliability (including periodic review of inter-rater reliability as appropriate), and provide valid evidence of student learning. Any number and variety of course-embedded activities can appropriately be used for course assessment. Examples include targeted subsets of multiple-choice items on comprehensive final exams, laboratory reports, oral class presentations, projects, and papers, among other student activities. More details on possible course-embedded activities for assessment as well as drafts of scoring rubrics can be found in Appendix IV. Once an instructor has submitted the necessary assessment activity summary information to the appropriate review panel and has received approval, the instructor need only resubmit in the event that the course content or assessment activities change substantially from those originally submitted or as requested for periodic updating and review. Finally, the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel will be responsible for determining that the required assessment is being undertaken. Submission of assessment activities and scoring criteria will be solicited prior to the start of the semester in which the course is to be assessed. Faculty will receive a packet of guidelines and assessment examples, as well as the relevant forms to submit. The Director for Assessment will coordinate collection of forms and forward them to the appropriate review panel. Prior to the end of the semester, the course instructor will receive information for submitting assessment results, including the necessary forms. Faculty Development A series of workshops will be offered to assist faculty and departments in the assessment process and help them comply with SUNY assessment requirements. Furthermore, the practice of assessment will be addressed in the orientation of all new faculty. Similarly, a variety of online resource materials will be provided, including guidebooks, pamphlets, frequently asked questions, and sample assessments. Numerous resources are currently posted on the website of UB s Center for Teaching and Learning Resources. Finally, faculty and departments will be encouraged to contact the Director for Assessment or a representative from the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel for direct assistance should they encounter any problems or difficulties. Continuous Review and Improvement As part of their review of assessment results, each Discipline-Based Review Panel will be asked to provide recommendations for improving learning outcome achievement on a three-year cycle. Those recommendations will be reviewed as part of the ongoing process of General Education curriculum review conducted in conjunction with the Academic Planning Committee and the 4

7 Educational Programs and Policy Committee. In addition, the panels will also be asked to submit recommendations to the Director for Assessment regarding the assessment process itself in order to fine-tune and expedite assessment procedures. Assessment Schedule GEAR guidelines call for the staggered assessment of all learning outcomes on a three-year cycle. UB was fortunate to pilot test the assessment process for several of the learning objectives in Fall 2003, which provided important insight into how the process might be managed. Below is the time frame for assessment of the various learning outcomes: Academic Year : Academic Year : Academic Year : Western Civilization Other World Civilizations Natural Sciences Social Sciences Information Management Humanities Arts American History uage Basic Communication Written Basic Communication Oral Mathematics Critical Thinking The learning outcomes selected for assessment during AY are the same ones as those included in the Fall 2003 pilot. Procedures for randomly sampling 20% of courses meeting the relevant General Education requirement are already in place. The set of outcomes selected for assessment late in the three-year cycle include those targeted in the new Strengthened Campus Based Assessment 7 initiative. Since GEAR guidelines are in the process of being developed, 8 we believe it would be best to delay assessment of those outcomes until later in the cycle. Furthermore, the specific learning outcomes for Mathematics are also in the process of being revised. However, it is UB s hope that assessment of the big three outcomes of Writing, Mathematics, and Critical Thinking might be implemented in advance of the time frame outlined above. Once GEAR s draft guidelines are finalized and if logistics allow, we hope to assess these outcomes as early as the academic year. Efforts to Date: Logistics and Pilot Results 9 In Fall 2003, UB identified a number of the SUNY learning outcomes for pilot-testing of the assessment process, namely the areas of Natural Science, Civilizations (Western and Other), Social Science, and Information Management. With the exception of Information Management, all outcomes were assessed within the formal classroom environment. Course sections were sampled in order to ensure that a minimum of 20% of students would be assessed. In some cases, 5

8 all sections take a single group-administered final exam, and so all sections were included in that case. The sampled sections almost universally elected to assess student learning based on select multiple-choice items from a comprehensive final exam, items that mapped to the specific learning outcomes. Criteria for classifying student performance varied both between and within knowledge areas, but the following standards were not atypical: 90% correct & above = Exceeds 75-89% correct = Meets 60-75% correct = Approaches Below 60% correct = Does not meet In those few cases where instructors chose assessment methods other than multiple-choice test items, 10 scoring was deemed to be highly objective and reliable, and instructors utilized a performance scoring scheme similar to that above, based on degree of difficulty. In the case of Information Management (an outcome infused in the General Education curriculum overall), students must complete an online workbook as part of a separate Library Skills requirement. At the end of workbook completion, students must successfully pass, prior to graduation, an online test of their Information Literacy Skills. The online examination process formed the basis for assessing students Information Management skills. Student performance on the learning outcome was classified based on the following scores: = Exceeds = Meets 0-22 = Does not meet Note that no determination of Approaches is made since the student must pass the exam with a minimum score of 23. Therefore, any score from 0-22 does not meet the learning objective at UB. Finally, because the assessment is not embedded in a single formal course, data were obtained for all students taking the examination rather than a sample of students. A campus Discipline-Based Review Panel already exists to continuously update and refine the Library Skills Workbook and the accompanying test on Information Literacy Skills. Rigor, degree of difficulty, and student performance are reviewed to determine appropriate skill cutoffs, based on revised test specifics. The content of the workbook and the accompanying online examination were carefully crafted based upon the Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) of the American Library Association (ALA). With respect to the validity of evaluation criteria, faculty consistently looked to professional standards within their own discipline in selecting activities and developing measures. For example, the items included on the test of Information Literacy Skills were developed according to the standards set out by the ALA, as noted above. In Natural Sciences, course content and performance standards are driven by guidelines set by professional organizations. For example, 6

9 Chemistry adheres to American Chemical Society (ACS) standards. All uage courses use a national definition for instructional level in assessing student proficiency with a language. Required Mathematics and Writing courses also conform to expectations laid out by their respective professional organizations. In all cases, instructors and departments carefully considered the content of their courses in light of nationally recognized standards of excellence in their respective disciplines. The pilot assessment process also proved valuable in improving course content. For example, in one Civilizations section, the instructor required that students complete a mapping exercise not required in other sections. Because the exercise was included in the instructor s assessment process and the students performed poorly, it appeared that the course needed improvement compared to other sections. However, upon further investigation, it was discovered that the mapping exercise helped pinpoint misunderstandings in the material, and the instructor then used this information to improve students comprehension. As a result, there is now significant conversation about the possibility of incorporating a similar mapping exercise into other Civilizations sections. The assessment process brought to light the importance of using assessment diagnostically and pedagogically. Aggregated results from the original pilot study are provided in Table 1, below. Additional details of the pilot testing and samples of the assessment methods employed are included in Appendix III. Table 1. Aggregated Results from Assessment Pilot Study 11 General Education Learning Outcomes UB General Education Pilot Assessment Results Fall 2003 % Exceed % Meet % Approach % Not Meet Western Civilization Other World Civilizations combined (n=161) Natural Sciences (n=1416) Social Sciences (n=214) Information Management (n=6327) Note: Results shown here are averaged across outcomes for each General Education area. To facilitate assessment, in several outcome areas the individual outcomes were broken down into even finer sub-outcomes in order to assess individual aspects of the SUNY outcomes for pilot analysis purposes. Complete details and finer breakdowns of individual learning outcomes can be found in Appendix III. The experiences of the pilot process demonstrated the workability of UB s basic approach and the acceptability of the process to many faculty who teach courses as part of the General Education program. Assessments also provided important information for improvement, with immediate action taken by many instructors to improve their own courses. Assessment results, accompanied by appropriate discipline-based review and recommendations, can be provided to the necessary faculty oversight groups where such results can significantly inform curricular policy. 7

10 Communication, Dissemination, and Program Improvement With the piloting of UB s assessment process, we were pleased to discover that much improvement in courses was spontaneous, with instructors identifying areas to target for revision. We also discovered that some sort of discipline-based review was necessary to properly interpret assessment results. As in the case (discussed previously) of the mapping exercise required in one Civilizations section, what appears at first a poor outcome in one section of a course may very well be the inspiration for implementing improvements in other sections. While instructors can use assessment results immediately and directly on their own to improve their classes, the Discipline-Based Review Panels also offer needed insight and a means by which coordination across the General Education curriculum can be facilitated. Such panels can also serve as a mechanism for disseminating innovations across the curriculum. Finally, the panels can play a pivotal role in advising the various campus-based faculty governance bodies on issues related to policy, curriculum content, and educational quality at UB. Therefore, the Discipline-Based Review Panels are central to the continuous improvement process and the dissemination of results to key University constituencies. UB also provides a number of additional outlets for informing the University community about campus-based issues. The UB Reporter, published weekly by UB s Office of News Services, informs the campus community on a variety of academic and research issues. UB s student newspaper, The Spectrum, is published three times weekly and is perhaps the most widely circulated and read publication on campus. The Spectrum continues to offer a student voice on issues, even when that perspective is at odds with the official University stance. UB students also publish a weekly magazine, called The Generation, which offers more in-depth articles on issues of student interest and also provides significant literary content to UB s diverse student community. UB also has an extensive web presence, with significant assessment information provided to the campus community on the site for UB s Center for Teaching and Learning Resources. Provision of additional assessment resource material is planned during the upcoming redesign of the web area for the newly formed Office of the Vice Provost and Dean of Undergraduate Education with its dedicated position of Director for Assessment. This web presence will specifically address issues and concerns regarding the campus-based assessment process itself and provide a needed forum for various constituencies to voice their ideas and concerns on assessment, student learning, course offerings, and the General Education curriculum overall. As a final component of the continuous improvement process, the Provost s Committee on Assessment will continue to meet so that the entire assessment process undergoes evaluation to streamline the process, continuously improve the quality of assessment data, and consider feedback from UB s many constituencies. Compliance of Plan with GEAR Criteria To demonstrate that UB s plan complies with the GEAR group s criteria 12 for assessment of its General Education program, each criterion will be discussed in turn: 8

11 1) The objectives for student learning in General Education relate directly to the student learning outcomes defined in the Implementation Guidelines of the Provost s Advisory Task Force on General Education. During Fall 2002, the UB Faculty Senate voted to accept the newly reconstituted General Education program, one that aligns directly with the SUNY outcomes outlined in the Implementation Guidelines of the Provost s Advisory Task Force. UB s undergraduate catalog clearly delineates the following requirements: 13 Writing: two courses Library Skills: completion of the Library Skills Workbook Mathematical Sciences: one course World Civilizations: complete World Civilizations I-II Natural Sciences: two courses (including lab) American Pluralism/American History: take American Pluralism/American History, or approved cognate Social and Behavioral Sciences: one course Language Requirement: complete second-semester course or demonstrate equivalent proficiency Humanities: one course Arts: one course Depth Requirement: one course Furthermore, the catalog outlines the SUNY learning outcomes as the basis for approval of General Education courses. 14 Appendix I also provides a specific mapping of UB s General Education requirements to the SUNY learning outcomes specified by the Provost s Advisory Task Force, along with corresponding assessment activities. 2) Programmatic activities intended to accomplish the campus objectives for student learning in General Education are described. GEAR review guidelines specifically state that it is sufficient to provide the guidelines for designating courses as meeting General Education Requirements. In all cases, UB specifically follows SUNY published guidelines in this regard. 15 Appendix II also lists those courses currently approved by SUNY as meeting the General Education outcomes. Finally, students are informed of approved courses in the undergraduate catalog. 3) The measures developed to assess student learning are designed to provide credible evidence of the extent to which students have achieved the learning outcomes or skills stated in the objectives. Consistent with GEAR recommendations, UB requires the following of all assessment measures: Direct measures: Measures must be direct evaluations of student work rather than student perceptions of achievement. Face validity: Measures must reasonably measure what they are intended to measure, as judged by the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel. 9

12 Reliability: Scoring must either be objective or, if subjective, then a rubric must be provided along with evidence of the inter-rater reliability of the scoring rubric, to the satisfaction of the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel. The Panel will also periodically re-assess reliability to ensure the ongoing quality of assessment measures. Representative sample: Students are sampled in clusters, with random selection of 20% of all course sections offered during the semester in which assessment takes place. (Random selection of students overall is not practicable.) 4) The plan proposes standards to which student performance relative to the learning outcomes in the objectives can be compared. UB s plan utilizes the classification system suggested by GEAR, with the reporting of the number and percent of students falling into four target categories: Exceeding, Meeting, Approaching, and Not Meeting the relevant learning outcomes. The determination of standards against which students are judged is left to the discretion of individual instructors. However, the standards for assignment of student performance into the various categories on the basis of scoring must be clearly delineated by the instructor to the relevant Discipline-Based Review Panel. During piloting of the assessment process, instructors consistently held students to high standards of achievement. 5) The anticipated results of the assessment are able to affirm the degree to which the learning objectives have been achieved and thus make it possible to identify areas that need to be addressed in order to improve learning. GEAR requests that a campus plan provide a means for dissemination of assessment results to appropriate constituencies and include a process for review and continuous improvement of its General Education program. The current plan proposes Discipline- Based Review Panels not only to oversee the assessment process for the designated learning outcomes, but also to offer discipline-based insight and make recommendations to existing Faculty Senate bodies charged with the overseeing the quality of UB s General Education program and making recommendations for change. Pilot testing also demonstrated the value of the assessment process itself in directly identifying areas for improvement and the willingness of individual faculty to unilaterally incorporate changes on the basis of assessment results. 6) The assessment plan has been reviewed and approved through the appropriate curriculum and faculty governance structures. The Faculty Senate voted to support the original assessment plan submitted by UB to SUNY System Administration in Spring 2002 for GEAR Group review. The current plan submission provides more detail based upon feedback from GEAR and UB s subsequent experience piloting its General Education assessment process during Fall The Faculty Senate Executive Committee is authorized to act on behalf of the entire Faculty Senate for issues that are of a time-sensitive nature. After review of the present plan, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee voted unanimously on January 26, 2005 to support the plan and recommend its submission by Provost Tripathi to SUNY and GEAR. 10

13 Details relating to implementation of the assessment plan will be overseen by the Faculty Senate and relevant committees. 7) The plan adheres to the timetable established by the GEAR Group and agreed to by the University Provost. The current plan outlines a time frame consistent with GEAR requirements, namely that the assessment of all learning outcomes will take place on a staggered basis on a threeyear repeating cycle. An ongoing process of continuous review and improvement also follows this three-year cycle and includes review of the assessment process itself. This plan has been reviewed by Provost Satish Tripathi and is being submitted along with his cover letter to GEAR. 8) The assessment process includes provisions for evaluating the assessment process itself and disseminating assessment results to the appropriate campus community. Conclusion Review of the assessment process itself is provided for through recommendations by the various Discipline-Based Review Panels to the Academic Policy Committee, the Educational Programs and Policy Committee, and the Director for Assessment. The various review panels and the Director for Assessment will also field faculty concerns and monitor compliance in order to improve the assessment process on an ongoing basis. Finally, the significant presence of campus media both written and online also help ensure that assessment results and program recommendations will reach the widest possible audience. The process of integrating assessment into the culture of academic life at UB still faces a number of challenges. However, the initial pilot process conducted at UB proves that the assessment of General Education, if properly centered in the disciplines themselves, can provide important feedback to all constituencies committed to academic excellence. While the immediate response may be to concern oneself with numerical results, the process itself provides the most important benefits. Instructors, always concerned that students may not be acquiring necessary skills for advanced-level work, will reap the benefits of having better prepared students. Those instructors directly engaged in the General Education program will find that assessment can be used to pinpoint student misunderstandings and provide the opportunity to clear up student confusion. Administrators who endeavor to improve educational quality will be afforded the opportunity to have meaningful dialogue with specialists in the various disciplinary areas included in UB s General Education program. And students themselves will likely accrue the greatest returns, since with improved basic skills and key understanding of major disciplines they will be better prepared to enter the world as educated and thoughtful citizens. 11

14 Endnotes 1 The official charge to the Provost s Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes is available online at The Provost s charge can also be found on pp. 3-4 of the Report of the Provost s Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes, entitled State University of New York Assessment Initiative, issued November 28, 2000 and available online at 2 See Appendix D, pp , of the report, ibid., note 1. 3 General Education Assessment Review (GEAR) Group, Review Process Guidelines, issued October 16, The guidelines were later updated (December 14, 2001) with the addition of two forms for submission to SUNY: Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes in General Education Summary Report, and Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes in General Education Campus Report. All documents can be downloaded from the GEAR website document page at 4 UB s process for approval of courses for purposes of meeting General Education requirements conforms to SUNYspecified guidelines. The SUNY guidelines for General Education course approvals are available online at 5 Faculty Senate committee charges can be found online at 6 Ibid., note 5. 7 The Strengthened Campus Based Assessment initiative was adopted by the Faculty Council of Community Colleges (FCCC) and the University Faculty Senate (UFS) in April 2004, and a formal resolution was passed by the SUNY Board of Trustees on June 22, Text of the resolution can be found on the GEAR website at 8 The revised GEAR plan review guidelines were circulated to SUNY campuses November 2004 for comment. The proposed revisions are available online at 9 Peter Gold, Associate Dean of General Education, College of Arts and Sciences, directed the piloting of UB s General Education assessment process during the Fall 2003 semester, and with the assistance of graduate students from UB s Graduate School of Education. 10 Examples included a mapping exercise, short answer questions, and short essays. In each case, grading criteria were clearly delineated and graduate assistants showed nearly perfect agreement in scoring. 11 Ibid., note Ibid., note Online at 14 Ibid., note Ibid., note 4. 12

15 APPENDIX I Mapping of UB General Education Requirements to SUNY Outcomes 13

16 Mapping of UB General Education Requirements to SUNY Outcomes Knowledge and Skills Areas / Competencies Mathematics* Learning Outcome Arithmetic, Algebra, Geometry (1 course) Data analysis, Quantitative reasoning Natural Sciences (2 courses) Social Sciences (1 course) American History (1 course) Western Civilization (2 courses) Understanding of the methods scientists use to explore natural phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical analysis Application of scientific data, concepts, and models in one of the natural sciences Understanding of the methods social scientists use to explore social phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical and interpretive analysis Knowledge of major concepts, models and issues of at least one discipline in the social sciences Knowledge of a basic narrative of American history: political, economic, social, and cultural, including knowledge of unity and diversity in American society Knowledge of common institutions in American society and how they have affected different groups Understanding of America s evolving relationship with the rest of the world Knowledge of the development of the distinctive features of the history, institutions, economy, society, culture, etc., of Western civilization Relate the development of Western civilization to that of other regions of the world. UB Requirement Minimum requirement for admission; advanced placement; 1 (advanced) course in Mathematical Sciences required 2-course sequence including 1 semester of lab 1 course from social and behavioral sciences UGC211 American Pluralism / American History, or 1 course from approved cognate list UGC111 & 112 World Civilizations I-II How assessed Assessment Nearly all UB undergraduates, of which over 2/3 will take Calculus, exceed the SUNY Mathematics learning outcomes upon arrival. Math placement is determined using SAT math, AP math, and Regents math scores. Anything less than strong competency in each of these areas makes the student unprepared for any course approved to meet the UB Gen Ed Mathematics requirement. Also, preliminary plan is to utilize a nationally-normed test, such as GRE, which includes a mathematics and quantitative reasoning component. Thus far, instructors have universally utilized outcome-specific multiple-choice items on comprehensive final exam. Scoring criteria for classifying student performance are submitted by each instructor, usually: % = exceeds, 80-89% = meets, 70-79% = approaches, below 70% = does not meet. Lab reports or other rubric-scored activities are also acceptable, although the instructor must submit the rubric, scoring criteria, and evidence of inter-rater reliability to the Natural Sciences Discipline-Based Review Panel. UB Natural Science courses consistently conform to guidelines of professional organizations for relevant discipline. In nearly all cases, instructor utilizes outcome-specific multiplechoice items on comprehensive final exam and submits scoring criteria for classifying student performance, usually: % = exceeds, 80-89% = meets, 70-79% = approaches, below 70% = does not meet. In some cases, an instructor chooses to assess an activity with a rubric. In such instances, the instructor must submit the rubric, scoring criteria, and evidence of inter-rater reliability to the Social Sciences Discipline-Based Review Panel. Generally, instructors elect to use outcome-specific multiple-choice items from comprehensive final exam and submit scoring criteria for classifying student performance within each competency, usually: % = exceeds, 80-89% = meets, 70-79% = approaches, below 70% = does not meet. Other approaches must be submitted to American History Discipline-Based Review Panel for review. Western and Other World Civilization areas are assessed in the same course(s), with each distinct outcome measured using multiple methods from comprehensive final exam, including multiple-choice, short-answer, essay, & terms. Scoring criteria within each outcome are: % = exceeds, 80-89% = meets, 70-79% = approaches, below 70% = does not meet. Any rubrics, if used, must be submitted for review to the Civilization Discipline- Based Review Panel. Scheduled VPUE General Education Assessment, revised: 1/12/05 * The five explicit learning outcomes in Mathematics in the Implementation Guidelines should be grouped, for reporting purposes, as two outcomes: [Arithmetic, Algebra, Geometry] and [Data analysis, Quantitative reasoning]. Also, the outcomes are currently under review and are expected to be revised soon. 14

17 Mapping of UB General Education Requirements to SUNY Outcomes Knowledge and Skills Areas / Competencies Other World Civilizations (1 course) Humanities (1 course, usually ENG201) The Arts (1 course) uage (2 nd semester language) Basic Communication (2 composition courses) Critical Thinking (Reasoning) Information Management (online workbook, no credit) Learning Outcome Knowledge of either a broad outline of world history, or the distinctive features of the history, institutions, economy, society, culture, etc., of one non-western civilization Knowledge of the conventions and methods of at least one of the humanities in addition to those encompassed by other knowledge areas required by the General Education program Understanding of at least one principal form of artistic expression and the creative process inherent therein Basic proficiency in the understanding and use of a foreign language Knowledge of the distinctive features of culture(s) associated with the language they are studying Produce coherent texts within common college-level written forms Demonstrate the ability to revise and improve such texts Research a topic, develop an argument, and organize supporting details Develop proficiency in oral discourse Evaluate an oral presentation according to established criteria Identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments as they occur in their own or other s work Develop well-reasoned arguments Perform the basic operations of personal computer use Understand and use basic research techniques Locate, evaluate and synthesize information from a variety of sources Assessment UB Requirement How assessed UGC111 & 112 World Civilization I & II Western and Other World Civilization areas are assessed in the same course(s), with each distinct outcome measured using multiple methods from comprehensive final exam, including multiple-choice, short-answer, essay, & terms. Scoring criteria within each outcome are: % = exceeds, 80-89% = meets, 70-79% = approaches, below 70% = does not meet. Any rubrics, if used, must be submitted for review to the Civilization Discipline- Based Review Panel. 1 course required from approved list Methods are wide-ranging given diversity of course areas, but must be submitted for approval. Options include pre-post testing, performance on test items from comprehensive final exam, or scoring using a rubric in which evidence of inter-rater reliability has been presented. In each case, instructor provides individual scoring criteria for review by Humanities Discipline-Based Review Panel. 1 course required from approved list Methods are wide-ranging given diversity of course areas, but must be submitted for approval. Options include pre-post testing, performance on test items from comprehensive final exam, evaluation of artistic performance, or scoring using a rubric in which evidence of inter-rater reliability has been presented. In each case, instructor provides individual scoring criteria for review by Arts Discipline-Based Review Panel. 2 nd semester course or proven Nearly all languages use multiple end-of-term measures that equivalent proficiency, demonstrated include speaking and reading comprehension to assess by: (1) HS diploma from non-englishspeaking country, (2) passing a outcome. Instructors must submit assessment method to the proficiency, and a test of cultural knowledge for the second challenge examination, or (3) uage Discipline-Based Review Panel, including appropriate AP/College Board exam sample test items, scoring criteria for classifying students, and if score. using rubrics, must submit rubric, scoring criteria, and evidence of inter-rater reliability. ENG101 & 102/201 Writing I & II Preliminary plan is to administer nationally-normed test, such as GRE, which includes verbal subtest as well as an analytical writing component. Infused, included specifically in ENG101 & 201 Writing I & II Infused Infused, online Library Skills Workbook 15 Preliminary plan is to use activity-based scoring rubric for each outcome, and/or administer Communication Apprehension measure (PCRA) with objective exam for oral pres eval skills. Preliminary plan is to administer nationally-normed test, such as GRE, which includes analytical writing component as well as relevant items on verbal and mathematics sections. Students must complete online workbook and pass Information Literacy Skills exam with a minimum score of 23 (out of 30). Scoring criteria are: = exceeds, = meets, 0-22 = does not meet. (Due to the minimum score requirement, there is no determination of approaches. ) Scheduled VPUE General Education Assessment, revised: 1/12/05

18 APPENDIX II UB Courses Approved by SUNY for Fulfillment of General Education Requirements 16

19 Guidelines for the Approval of SUNY-GER Courses UB Courses Approved for General Education by SUNY Category Course Restrictions Mathematics CEP 207 Intro to Statistics and Computing Mathematics CSE 111 Great Ideas in Computer Science I Mathematics CSE 112 Great Ideas in Computer Science II Mathematics CSE 113 Intro to Computer Science I Mathematics CSE 114 Intro to Computer Science II Mathematics CSE 115 Intro to Computer Science for Majors I Mathematics CSE 116 Intro to Computer Science for Majors II Mathematics CSE 191 Intro to Discrete Mathematics Mathematics CSE 192 Intro to Discrete Mathematics Mathematics MGQ 301 Statistical Decisions in Management Mathematics MTH 115 Survey of Algebra and Trigonometry Mathematics MTH 121 Survey of Calculus and Its Applications I Mathematics MTH 122 Survey of Calculus and Its Applications II Mathematics MTH 131 Mathematical Analysis for Management Mathematics MTH 141 Calculus I Mathematics MTH 142 Calculus II Mathematics MTH 151 Enriched Calculus I Mathematics MTH 152 Enriched Calculus II Mathematics MTH 153 Honors Calculus I Mathematics MTH 154 Honors Calculus II Mathematics PHI 315 Symbolic Logic Mathematics PHI 415 Logical Theory I Mathematics PHI 416 Logical theory II Mathematics PSC 408 Basic Statistics for Social Science Mathematics PSY 207 Psychological Statistics Mathematics SOC 404 Basic Statistics for Social Sciences Mathematics SSC 225 Basic Statistics for Social Science Mathematics STA 111 Intro to Statistics I Mathematics STA 112 Intro to Statistics II Mathematics STA 119 Statistical Methods Mathematics ULC 148 Algebra and Trigonometry Natural Sciences BIO 119 Basic Biology I Natural Sciences BIO 120 Basic Biology II Natural Sciences BIO 129 Perspectives in Human Biology Natural Sciences BIO 130 Perspectives in Human Biology Natural Sciences BIO 200 Evolutionary Biology Natural Sciences BIO 201 Cell Biology Natural Sciences BIO 309 Ecology Natural Sciences CHE 101 General Chemistry Natural Sciences CHE 102 General Chemistry Natural Sciences CHE 103 Chemical Principles Natural Sciences CHE 104 Chemical Principles Natural Sciences CHE 105 Chemistry: Principles and Applications Natural Sciences CHE 106 Chemistry: Principles and Applications Natural Sciences CHE 107 General Chemistry for Engineers Natural Sciences CHE 108 General Chemistry for Engineers 17

20 Guidelines for the Approval of SUNY-GER Courses Natural Sciences GEO 101 Physical Environmental Geography I Natural Sciences GEO 106 Physical Environmental Geography II Natural Sciences GLY 101 Global Environmental Science Natural Sciences GLY 102 Global Environmental Science Natural Sciences GLY 103 The Earth Natural Sciences GLY 104 Earth History Natural Sciences NTR 108 Human Nutrition Natural Sciences NTR 109 Nutrition in Practice Natural Sciences PHY 101 Physics I Natural Sciences PHY 102 Physics II Natural Sciences PHY 107 General Physics I Natural Sciences PHY 108 General Physics II Natural Sciences PHY 117 Honors Physics I Natural Sciences PHY 118 Honors Physics II Natural Sciences PHY 121 Descriptive Astronomy I Natural Sciences PHY 122 Descriptive Astronomy II Social Sciences APY 105 Intro to Anthropology Social Sciences APY 106 Intro to Cultural Anthropology Social Sciences APY 108 Intro to Archaeology Social Sciences CDS 151 Intro to Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology Social Sciences ECO 181 Intro to Macroeconomics Social Sciences ECO 182 Intro to Microeconomics Social Sciences GEO 100 Geographic Perspectives and World Issues Social Sciences GEO 102 Intro to Human Geography Social Sciences GEO 103 Geography of Economic Systems Social Sciences GEO 120 Maps and Mapping Social Sciences HIS 142 British History Social Sciences HIS 151 Western Civilization I Social Sciences HIS 152 Western Civilization II Social Sciences HIS 161 United States History I Social Sciences HIS 162 United States History II Social Sciences HIS 182 Asian Civilization II Social Sciences LIN 207 Language Society and the Individual Social Sciences PHI 101 Intro to Philosophy Social Sciences PSC 101 Intro to American Politics Social Sciences PSC 103 Politics Abroad Social Sciences PSY 101 Intro to Psychology Social Sciences SOC 101 Intro to Sociology Social Sciences WS 213 Women in Contemporary Society Am History HIS 161 United States History I Am History HIS 162 United States History II Am History LIN 200 Language in Pluralistic America Am H Regents Score > 84 Am History UGC 211 American Pluralism (designated sections) Am H Regents Score > 84 Am History UGC 211 American Pluralism (designated sections) Western Civ UGC 111 & 112 World Civilizations I & II Other World Civ UGC 111 & 112 World Civilizations I & II Humanities AAS 100 Intro to African American Studies Humanities CL 113 Myth and Religion in the Ancient World Humanities COL 250 Masterpieces of World Literature Humanities ENG 221 World Masterpieces I 18