Emergency care in children Pavlyshyn Halyna Andriyivna Ternopil state medical university.
Educational Effectiveness Fall Faculty Retreat 2006 Leanne Neilson Halyna Kornuta
-
Upload
thaddeus-bryant -
Category
Documents
-
view
20 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Educational Effectiveness Fall Faculty Retreat 2006 Leanne Neilson Halyna Kornuta
Educational Effectiveness:What is it?
What we want our students to know
• Competencies, knowledge, skills, abilities,
applications, and dispositions
How we know they know it
• Evidence
Why Bother? Our need for Evidence
Student Recruitment
Accreditation
Fundraising / Grants
Institutional Improvement, Self-
study and Reflection
Indirect EvidencePerceptions and Input
Methods
Student Satisfaction Surveys
Student Exit Surveys Alumni Surveys Employer Surveys Focus groups Exit Interviews with
Graduates
Data Mining
Faculty/Student ratios Percentage of students who
study abroad Enrollment trends Percentage of students who
graduate within six years Diversity of students, faculty,
staff Retention and Transfer Studies Percentage of students who go
on to graduate school Job Placement Statistics
Direct Evidence Products of Student Learning
Student work samples
Portfolios Capstone projects Assessment of
student performance
Case Analysis
Pre-and post-tests
Blind scored assignments
Locally developed tests
Standardized tests
National licensure examinations
CLU Indirect Evidence
N S S ENational
Survey of
Student
Engagement
B C S SBeginning
College
Student
Survey
NSSE 2005 / 2001
Table 6 Diversity: CLU First-years/Seniors compared with Selected Peers and NSSE Nationwide First-year/Seniors
11: Educational and Personal Growth: To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in the following areas? (Scale: 1=Very little 2=Some 3=Quite a bit 4=Very much)
Means Comparison
CLU NSSE Nationwide
N= 174 first-year (FY) students (2005) N= 159 senior year (SR) students (2005)
2005 2001 2005 2001
l. Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds
NSSE 2005 / 2001
Table 6 Diversity: CLU First-years/Seniors compared with Selected Peers and NSSE Nationwide First-year/Seniors
11: Educational and Personal Growth: To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in the following areas? (Scale: 1=Very little 2=Some 3=Quite a bit 4=Very much)
Means Comparison
CLU NSSE Nationwide
N= 174 first-year (FY) students (2005) N= 159 senior year (SR) students (2005)
2005 2001 2005 2001
FY 2.70 2.45 2.59 2.58 l. Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds
SR 2.66 2.49 2.60 2.64
NSSE 2005 / 2001
Table 6 Diversity: CLU First-years/Seniors compared with Selected Peers and NSSE Nationwide First-year/Seniors
1: Academic, Intellectual, and Social Experiences: In your experience at your institution during the current school year, about how often have you done each of the following? (Scale: 1=Never 2=Sometimes 3=Often 4=Very often)
Means Comparison
CLU NSSE Nationwide
N= 174 first-year (FY) students (2005) N= 159 senior year (SR) students (2005)
2005 2001 2005 2001
FY 2.73 2.67 2.60 2.60
SR 2.75 2.58 2.65 2.59
u. Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own
NSSE 2005 / 2001
Table 6 Diversity: CLU First-years/Seniors compared with Selected Peers and NSSE Nationwide First-year/Seniors
1: Academic, Intellectual, and Social Experiences: In your experience at your institution during the current school year, about how often have you done each of the following? (Scale: 1=Never 2=Sometimes 3=Often 4=Very often)
Means Comparison
CLU NSSE Nationwide
N= 174 first-year (FY) students (2005) N= 159 senior year (SR) students (2005)
2005 2001 2005 2001
FY 2.73 2.67 2.60 2.60
FY *
1 – 15% 2 – 27%
1 – 16% 2 – 29%
1 – 15% 2 – 34%
1 – 15% 2 – 34%
SR 2.75 2.58 2.65 2.59
u. Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own * Note: % for respondents who selected 1 (never) and 2 (sometimes)
SR *
1 – 10% 2 – 37%
1 – 13% 2 – 39%
1 – 12% 2 – 35%
1 – 13% 2 – 37%
BCSS
17j. Participate in a
school-sponsored
community service
project
NSSE
1k. Participated in a
community-based
project (e.g. service
learning) as part of a
regular course
Noel-Levitz 2006
Noel Levitz Adult Student Priorities Survey CLU
N=310 National Adult
Students
Item (Scale: 1= not at all satisfied to 7= very satisfied) Satis / SD Satis / SD Mean
Difference
3. Faculty care about me as an individual. 5.96 / 1.09 5.65 / 1.32 0.31
19. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about requirements in my major.
6.06 / 1.29 5.66 / 1.49 0.40
26. Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.
5.77 / 1.21 5.41 / 1.44 0.36
32. My classes provide opportunities to improve my technology skills.
5.61 / 1.25 5.29 / 1.46 0.32
40. Faculty are usually available for adult students outside the classroom by phone, by e-mail or in-person.
6.11 / 1.03 5.90 / 1.25 0.21
50. My advisor helps me apply my academic major to specific career goals.
5.44 / 1.49 4.97 / 1.74 0.47
CLU Indirect Evidence
Library Expenditures and Usage
Total FTE
Total Library Expenditures
Per FTE
Circulation Transaction (Including Reserves) Per FTE
Total Interlibrary
Loans Received
Comparison Group Median
State Median (CA)
National Median
CLU 2,500 $276 8 1,680
Whitworth College, WA
Pacific University, OR
Univ of Portland, OR
Pacific Lutheran Univ, WA
FTE: Full Time Equivalent Student 12 month Enrollment
Source: Education Dept. Biannual Survey of Academic Libraries 2003 - 04
CLU Indirect Evidence
Library Expenditures and Usage
Total FTE
Total Library Expenditures
Per FTE
Circulation Transaction (Including Reserves) Per FTE
Total Interlibrary
Loans Received
Comparison Group Median 3,362 $446 12 4,223
State Median (CA) 1,464 $179 7 103
National Median 1,431 $277 9 365
CLU 2,500 $276 8 1,680
Whitworth College, WA 2,045 $387 12 2,435
Pacific University, OR 2,222 $660 21 10,054
Univ of Portland, OR 2,927 $560 21 5,929
Pacific Lutheran Univ, WA 3,167 $654 15 6,758
FTE: Full Time Equivalent Student 12 month Enrollment
Source: Education Dept. Biannual Survey of Academic Libraries 2003 - 04
CLU Direct EvidenceStudent Learning OutcomesStudent Learning Outcomes
Written Communication
Information Literacy
Critical Thinking
W I C
WIC 2005
Table 2 Spring 2005 Summary of Criteria and Mean Scores
Course Type Mean Scores Summary Criteria Freshmen
English N =88
Writing Intensive N = 152
Capstone
N = 99
N = 339 Written Communication (5 point analytic rubric)
1. Clear thesis/purpose/topic 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.2 2. Paper organized/unified 2.9 3.3 3.2 3.1 3. Free of errors—grammar, punctuation, spelling 3.3 3.3 2.9 3.2 4. Purpose/thesis addressed throughout 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.3 5. Supporting argument, evidence, examples 2.9 3.4 3.3 3.2
6. Language and Vocabulary 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.5 7. Conclusion (synthesis & addresses thesis/purpose) 2.7 2.9 3.1 2.9
8. Maintains level of excellence throughout 2.9 3.2 3.1 3.1 Written Communication Mean 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.2
Critical Thinking Score and Mean (4 point holistic rubric)
2.5 2.8 2.7
WIC 2006
Table 3 Spring 2006 Summary of Criteria and Mean Scores
Course Type Mean Scores Summary Criteria
Freshmen English N =56
Writing Intensive N = 88
Capstone
N = 37
N = 181
Written Communication, Critical Thinking, and Information Literacy (4 point analytic rubric)
1. Articulates focus 3.1 2.8 3.6 3.0 2. Finds sources 2.1 2.9 3.2 2.7 3. Analyzes and evaluates sources 2.7 2.7 3.3 2.8 4. Synthesizes information to support arguments 2.7 2.6 3.1 2.7 5. Presents arguments 2.6 2.5 3.2 2.7 6. Uses conventions of standard U.S. English 3.0 3.1 2.9 3.0 7. Creates conclusion 2.6 2.5 3.4 2.7
Mean 2.7 2.7 3.3 2.8
CLU Direct EvidenceSOE
Field Supervisor Evaluation
Course Work (Portfolio)
Comprehensive Exam / Thesis / Webfolio Defense
Entrance / Exit Interviews
Alumni Survey
Employer / Administrator Survey
Additional Evidence
Assignment / Evidence C E D SLO e.g. Complete an analysis of a journal article requiring students to identify, interpret, assess, and evaluate relevant information. This assignment occurs again later in the semester. A rubric is used to score both assignments providing evidence of student achievement.
Critical Thinking