|
Assessment Versus Research Model |
|
|
When we planned the Summer Institute, we expected both major guest speakers to use the Learner Outcomes model in a similar way. We were surprised to find that Howard Community College and California State University at Monterey Bay have taken quite different approaches. CSUMB focuses on outcomes, activities, and assessment in each individual class. We learned how professors have reorganized their courses, presenting the learner outcomes in their syllabi, using classroom-based assessment techniques to ascertain which outcomes the students feel are being taught during any particular activity, and assessing how students have mastered the outcomes at the end of the course. Each department and major has also defined learner outcomes for their programs and identified which classes fulfill them. To graduate from the CSU Monterey Bay, students must show competency in the learner outcomes identified for the college as a whole. The language and concept of learner outcomes is woven throughout every aspect of the university. Howard Community College uses the learner outcomes model very differently. For Howard faculty, the model is a research tool to help them discover if students are learning the material in their courses. They conduct studies to test their outcomes, often asking students to take standardized tests designed by those outside the college or to have their work evaluated by outside experts. The emphasis is on testing, data collection and analysis and interpretation. The results of these studies are used to improve instruction. Every full-time instructor at Howard Community College must participate in a Learning Outcomes Assessment project. Some focus on individual classes while others study the work of all students enrolled in several sections of the same course. Learner Outcomes Institute participants found both approaches valuable. As they developed curriculum plans for their Fall 1999 course, they were free to incorporate either model. Some designed Howard-style research projects while others took the CSUMB approach. Many borrowed aspects from both.
|
|