18. Program-Level Assessment of Learning Outcomes in a Faculty Certificate Program on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Harry Hubball,Gary Poole

doi:10.22329/celt.v1i0.3187

Abstract

105 O an international scale, higher education reform is having a profound impact on organizations and institutions, where there are now mandates and requirements to implement explicit learning outcomes and assessment policies for all undergraduate curricula (Bresciani, 2006; Hubball & Burt, 2004; Hubball & Burt, 2007). Program-level learning outcomes are a central component of learning-centred curricula and inform students what they can expect to achieve from a program of study so that they may organise their time and efforts, and prepare for assessments. They also connect segments of a curriculum, thus enhancing transferability of student learning, communicate curriculum/program goals in a meaningful way to a broader community, help to determine the extent to which learning has been accomplished, and guide faculty and administrators (within resource constraints), in part, to determine program(s) of study, course objectives, appropriate learning experiences, and assessment and program evaluation strategies (Barab & Duffy, 2000; Hubball & Gold, 2007). This paper highlights program-level assessment of learning outcomes in an 8-month Faculty Certificate Program (UBC-FCP) on the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) at the University of British Columbia (UBC).

Highlights

On an international scale, higher education reform is having a profound impact on organizations and institutions, where there are mandates and requirements to implement explicit learning outcomes and assessment policies for all undergraduate curricula (Bresciani, 2006; Hubball & Burt, 2004; Hubball & Burt, 2007)
The following framework and critical elements guided the development and implementation of programlevel learning outcomes: Learning context strategies. This refers to a comprehensive needs assessment which was conducted by consulting with various sources to guide the development of program-level learning outcomes
This refers to the logistics of program scheduling, as well as the development of explicit core program-level learning outcomes; i.e., in the context of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), University of British Columbia (UBC)-FCP faculty will demonstrate: 1) the acquisition, application and integration of SoTL knowledge; 2) research skills, including the ability to define problems and access, retrieve and evaluate SoTL information; 3) a critically reflective practice and problem-solving abilities with respect to SoTL; 4) responsible use of ethical principles; and 5) effective leadership, communication, and interpersonal skills (Table 1 shows how specific learning outcomes relate to UBC-FCP learning experiences)

Summary

Introduction

Higher education reform is having a profound impact on organizations and institutions, where there are mandates and requirements to implement explicit learning outcomes and assessment policies for all undergraduate curricula (Bresciani, 2006; Hubball & Burt, 2004; Hubball & Burt, 2007). Program-level learning outcomes are a central component of learning-centred curricula and inform students what they can expect to achieve from a program of study so that they may organise their time and efforts, and prepare for assessments. Approaches to teaching and learning refer to on-going professional development, reflection, and initiation of positive changes to curricula and/or pedagogical practices Taking this concept to the level of rigour, SoTL refers to the dissemination of practice-driven curricula and/or pedagogical research in peer-review contexts. Action research (AR) methodology is at the very heart of SoTL In this context, AR was employed to strengthen the underlying theory/rationale for learning experiences within a program, and gain authentic data on which to (cyclically) reflect on the effectiveness of processes and outcomes (Altrichter, Psch, & Somekh, 1993; Hubball & Clarke, 2004; Hubball & Levy, 2004; Wolfe, Hill, & Evers, 2006).

When and how do faculty members demonstrate learning outcomes in this context?

Results

Conclusion