通识教育 评估工具和标准
标准 | 最初的 | 新兴 | 发达 | 高度发达的 |
---|---|---|---|---|
通用电气的结果 | GE learning outcomes have not yet been developed for the entire GE program; there may be one or two common ones, e.g., writing, critical thinking. | 学习成果已经为整个通用电气项目开发,但列表存在问题(e.g. too long, too short, unconnected to mission and non可估价的 values.) | 结果组织得很好, 可估价的, and focus on the most important knowledge, 技能, 和GE值. Work to define levels of performance is beginning. | 结果 are reasonable, appropriate, and 可估价的. 有明确的标准,如评分标准,用于评估学生的学习情况. 每个结果都指定了不同级别的范例或学生表现. |
课程定位 with 结果 | No clear relationship between the outcomes and the GE curriculum. Students may not have opportunity to develop each outcome adequately. | Students appear to have opportunities to develop each outcome. Curriculum map shows opportunities to acquire outcomes. Sequencing and frequency of opportunities may be problematic. | 课程的明确设计是为了给学生提供机会,让他们对每一个结果都有更大的了解. 课程地图显示了“初级”、“中级”和“高级”治疗的结果. | 课程设置、教学方法、评分、咨询都明确与通用电气的成果相一致. Curriculum map and rubrics are well known and consistently used. 共同课程被视为通用电气学习的资源,并与通用电气的成果相一致. |
评估计划 | No formal plan for assessing each GE outcome. 没有协调员或委员会负责项目或其评估计划的实施. | 通用电气的评估依赖于短期计划:选择在本年度评估哪些结果. Interpretation and use of findings are implicit rather than planned or funded. No individual or committee is in charge. | 校园里有合理的, 确定何时评估每项成果的多年评估计划. Plan addresses use of findings for improvement. A coordinator or committee is charged to oversee assessment. | Campus has a fully articulated, 可持续发展的, 多年评估计划,描述何时以及如何评估每项成果. A coordinator or committee leads review and revision of the plan, as needed. Campus uses some form of comparative data (e.g., own past record, aspirational goals, external benchmarking). |
评估实施 | 不清楚是否收集了每个GE结果的潜在有效证据和/或个别审稿人使用特殊的标准来评估学生的工作. | Appropriate evidence is collected; some discussion of relevant criteria for assessing outcome. 学生作业的审稿人经过校准,以同样的方式应用评估标准, and/or faculty check for inter-rater reliability. | Appropriate evidence is collected; faculty use explicit criteria, 比如规则, to assess student attainment of each outcome. 学生作业的审稿人经过校准,以同样的方式应用评估标准; faculty routinely checks for inter-rater reliability. | 评估标准, 比如规则, have been pilot-tested and refined and typically shared with students. Reviewers are calibrated with high inter-rater reliability. 在解释结果和决定改进时使用的比较数据. |
使用结果 | 收集GE结果的结果,但不讨论很少或没有集体使用的结果. Students are unaware of and/or uninvolved in the process. | Results are collected and discussed by relevant faculty; results used occasionally to improve the GE program. 学生们模糊地意识到改善学习的结果和评估. | Results for each outcome are collected, discussed by relevant faculty, and regularly used to improve the program. Students are very aware of and engaged in improvement of their learning. | Relevant faculty routinely discusses results, 计划的改进, 确保必要的资源, 并实施改变. They may collaborate with others to improve the program. Follow-up studies confirm that changes have improved learning. |
Guidelines for Using the 通识教育 Rubric
For the fullest picture of an institution’s accomplishments, 对书面材料的审查应在访问时增加面谈. Discussion validates that the reality matches the written record.
标题的尺寸:
- 通用电气的结果. The GE learning outcomes consists of the most important knowledge, 技能, and values students learn in the GE program. There is no strict rule concerning the optimum number of outcomes, and quality is more important than quantity. Do not confuse learning processes (e.g., 完成一个科学实验室)与学习成果(在科学实验室学到了什么), such as ability to apply the scientific method). Outcome statements specify what students do to demonstrate their learning. Criteria for assessing student work are usually specified in rubrics, and faculty identify examples of varying levels of student performance, such as work that does not meet expectations, that meets expectations and that exceeds expectations.
问题: Is the list of outcomes reasonable and appropriate? Do the outcomes express how students can demonstrate learning? 教员们是否就评估每项成果的明确标准达成一致,比如标准? 他们是否有代表每个结果的不同精通程度的工作范例? - 课程定位. 如果没有明确为培养这些成果而设计的通用电气课程,学生就无法对掌握学习成果负责. 这种设计通常被概括为课程图——一个显示课程和学习成果之间关系的矩阵. 与结果相一致的教学方法和评分有助于鼓励学生成长,并为学生的发展提供反馈. 也可以设计相关的学术支持和学生服务,以支持学习成果的发展, since learning occurs outside of the classroom as well as within it.
问题: Is the GE curriculum explicitly aligned with program outcomes? Does faculty select effective pedagogies and use grading to promote learning? 支持服务是否明确与促进学生发展通用电气学习成果相一致? - 评估计划. 需要制定明确的、可持续的计划来评估通用电气的每一项成果. Each outcome does not need to be assessed every year, 但该计划应该在一段合理的时间内对结果进行循环, such as the period for program review cycles. Experience and feedback from external reviewers can guide plan revision.
问题: Does the campus have a GE assessment plan? Does the plan clarify when, how, and how often each outcome will be assessed? Will all outcomes be assessed over a reasonable period of time? 这个计划可持续吗?? Supported by appropriate resources? 计划是否根据外部评审人员的经验和反馈进行了必要的修订? Does the plan include collection of comparative data? - 评估实施. 评估需要根据公认的标准收集有效的证据,以确定工作是否达到或超过预期. These criteria are usually specified in rubrics. 合格的评委应该对学生的学习成绩得出相同的结论, demonstrating inter-rater reliability. If two judges independently assess a set of materials, 他们的评级可以相互关联,他们的分数之间的差异可以被检查. 如果相关性高和/或差异小,则数据是可靠的. Raters generally are calibrated (“normed”) to increase reliability. 校准通常包括一个培训课程,在这个课程中,评分员将规则应用于预先选择的质量不同的学生作业示例, then reach consensus about the rating each example should receive. 目的是确保所有评分员以相同的方式应用标准,以便每个学生的产品获得相同的分数, 不管评分高低.
问题GE评估研究是否系统地为每个目标结果收集有效证据? 教师是否使用商定的标准,如评估每个结果的证据的规则? Do they share the criteria with their students? 那些评估学生作业的人在使用评估准则时是否经过校准? Does the campus routinely document high inter-rater reliability? Do faculty pilot-test and refine their assessment processes? 他们在解释结果时是否考虑外部基准(比较)数据? - 使用结果. Assessment is a process designed to monitor and improve learning. 教师可以对每个结果进行反思,并决定是可以接受还是令人失望. If results do not meet faculty standards, 教员(和其他人), such as student affairs personnel, 图书馆员, and tutors) can determine what changes should be made, e.g., in pedagogy, curriculum, student support, or faculty supports.
问题: Do faculty collect assessment results, 讨论它们, and reach conclusions about student achievement? Do they develop explicit plans to improve student learning? Do they implement those plans? 他们是否有确保必要资源以支持此实现的历史? 他们是否与其他校园专业人员合作,以提高学生的学习? Do follow-up studies confirm that changes have improved learning?