to bring an assignment and samples of student work to the May 12th meeting by 81ZTt02

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 6

									                                            Summary
     During the 2007-08 academic year, three Health and Human Services programs (IT for
     Healthcare, Pharmacy Tech, and Medical Assisting) met with a curriculum facilitator, Jane
     Lister Reis, with the goal to work on six program goals:

     (1) review learning outcomes for their programs;
     (2) complete the “mapping process” for the learning outcomes in their respective programs
     by identifying where each outcome was Introduced, Reinforced, or Emphasized;
     (3) identify courses that might need to be added/deleted/changed in the program to better
     support student learning;
     (4) identify one program outcome to focus on by examining student work with respect to a
     specific assignment;
      (5) determine criteria for “what is good” in terms of the learning outcome and ensure that
     rubrics clearly identify these stages of learning; and
     (6) based on the above assessment process, identify any changes made to the program to
     enhance student learning—either with respect to the examined outcome and/or with respect
     to the program in general.

     This document and accompanying files is a record of this work for these three programs.



I.    IT FOR HEALTHCARE

Notes from Professional Technical Meeting – IT for Healthcare
April 21, 2008
Present: Michaelann Allen (faculty coordinator, Medical Assisting), Loretta Ryan (faculty
coordinator, IT for Healthcare), Jack Bautsch (Director, Institutional Effectiveness), Bob
Fineman (Dean, Health and Human Services) and Jane Lister Reis (curriculum support)

         Discussion was made to have all faculty who teach classes within in this program to
          complete program matrix.
         Decision was made to focus on Outcome #7 (Utilize clinical software effectively and
          demonstrate knowledge of clinical software”) within AHE 232 (Introduction to Clinical
          Software).
         Decision was made to bring an assignment and samples of student work to the May 12th
          meeting.

Professional Technical Mapping Meeting – IT for Healthcare
May 12, 2008
Present: Loretta Ryan, Bob Fineman, Tim Figenbaum (faculty, IT), Jane Lister Reis

         The group looked at samples of student work from AHE 232 course along with a basic
          scoring guide for what evidence of learning was needed to pass the quiz. This quiz

                                                 1
        related to program outcome #7. The group spent some time talking about the concepts
        were taught, what was learned by looking at how well the students did on the quiz, and
        how this information influenced her thinking as a teacher.
       Bob asked Loretta if the process of doing this work (mapping her program) was been
        helpful to her as a faculty member. Loretta’s response was that this process has given
        her more confidence as a teacher. Good outcome!
       When asked if she made changes based on students’ input or student work, Loretta
        stated that student feedback was instrumental in her course development and that she has
        made substantive changes in how she teaches based on student feedback. For example,
        students asked her to give both the “big picture” as well as the smaller concepts. Other
        changes have been reported in the “Assessment Feedback” form (J. Bautsch).
       Tim Figenbaum (EET 131) and Loretta looked at the program matrix and had a
        conversation about where specific outcomes were specifically taught and assessed.
        Loretta reported that she had mapped the outcomes differently than how Tim had
        reported them on the program matrix. Tim added two other “E’s.” Both faculty reported
        that these differences were important to note.
       Jane asked Tim to list the different kinds of students who take his course, EET 131. Tim
        reported that he has students who are in the network program, electronics, HVAC, A+
        certification, IT for Healthcare and I-Best (ESL students). He usually finds out from the
        students about their career pathway as the course unfolds. He and Loretta discussed the
        different concepts taught in her course (AHE 232) and his EET 131.
       Loretta and Tim discussed schedule issues. Loretta said that at this point the schedule
        worked well and that students did not have a difficult time getting the classes they
        needed.
       A final discussion centered on the courses missing in the IT for Healthcare program
        matrix: BUS 118, BUS 169, BUS 236, and AHI 100. Concerns surfaced, for example,
        regarding specific courses that students reported that they needed more support. Follow
        up action will be taken with the dean. There was also a discussion about shifting from
        one course to another which had similar learning outcomes. Again, follow up action
        required. (Note: By the end of spring quarter 2008, this outcome information for the
        missing courses was supplied by the specific program faculty.)

Value of Program Assessment for Students: Based on feedback from students and from the
program planning work done with the program coordinator, program faculty and the dean,
students are now encouraged to take IT 101 rather than BUS 169 (previously students were given
the choice) because it was determined that BUS 169 better meets the outcomes for the program
and therefore is a better choice for students.

II. MEDICAL ASSISTING

Notes from Professional Technical Meeting – Medical Assisting
April 21, 2008

                                               2
Present: Michaelann Allen (MA), Loretta Ryan (IT for Healthcare), Jack Bautsch, Bob Fineman
and Jane Lister Reis (staff support)

      Michaelann reported that she would like to focus on the critical thinking learning
       outcome in her program. A meeting was set up for May 20th, 1:30-2:30. At that meeting,
       she will bring assignments and samples of student work.


Notes from Professional Technical Meeting –Medical Assisting
May 20, 2008
Present: Michaelann Allen, Bob Fineman, Jane Lister Reis
     The goal of this meeting was for Michaelann to bring samples of student work that
        related to an assignment where critical thinking was a learning outcome. However,
        rather than looking at student work, we spent most of the meeting critiquing the General
        Education Critical Thinking rubric (draft), developed by the Critical Thinking gen ed
        task force, and its applicability to Medical Assisting courses and various assignments.
        (The feedback re the rubric will be forwarded to Brian Holt, chair of the CT task force.)
     Michaelann noted that although critical thinking was embedded in almost all of her
        courses and assignments, it is more implicit than explicitly taught, and that the rubric,
        with the proposed modifications, would be a very useful tool by providing students with
        a clear understanding of the four steps of critical thinking (observation, comparison,
        conclusion, and reflection).
     We discussed how Michaelann could use this rubric as a pre- and post-assessment tool
        in her program.
     We also discussed the creation of a comprehensive capstone exam that could be tied to
        the learning outcomes of the program. By designing the capstone exam in this way,
        Michaelann would have a clear assessment of her students’ ability to demonstrate
        competency related to her program’s specific learning outcomes.

Next steps: To see a revised assignment that uses the Critical Thinking rubric and samples of
student work that we can score. (Suggestion made that this assessment task would be an
important and interesting experience for TAC members.)

Value of Program Assessment for Students:
Focusing on the outcome of critical thinking and through the analysis of the Medical
Assisting Program matrix (attached), the faculty coordinator has made plans to add a critical
thinking component to the AMA 101 “Communications in Healthcare” module (since critical
thinking is a key learning outcome in the program). A new assignment on pediatric
immunizations will be implemented summer quarter 2008 that includes critical thinking
questions. Also added will be "additional questions" to several modules that require students to
think critically in response to specific healthcare related questions. Lastly, the lab assignment
in AMA 110 that asks students to think critically about lab results and the new immunization
assignment were to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for discussion.


                                                 3
III. PHARMACY TECH
March 4, 2007
Present: Bob Fineman, Uyen Thorstensen (faculty coordinator of the Pharmacy Tech
program), Jane Lister Reis (support)

      Program Discussion centered on ways to create clearer expectations on syllabi, higher
       grade point to graduate, class sign-in sheet, addition of a capstone course, and a graded
       survey by employees in students’ externship program. All of these suggestions and new
       curricula would add greater clarity to the program and provide students with a higher
       level of expectation by the college.
      In respect to the mapping process, the Pharmacy Tech map is nearly complete with
       identified flow of courses and program learning outcomes plus gen ed (related
       instruction) requirements. By doing the mapping process, Uyen has decided to merge
       PHA 140/141 (Aseptic Technique) into one class.

   Next Steps:
      1. Complete the mapping process by the 2nd of week of spring quarter (identifying those
          courses that “emphasize” (E) the learning outcomes by specifically teaching the skill
          or knowledge and assessing students’ understanding/competency.
      2. Invite all part-time faculty to this meeting who teach in her program to a meeting to
          view the map and discuss outcomes in relationship to specific courses.
      3. Bring sample assignments that relate to specific outcomes so faculty who teach in the
          program can discuss. Are their common rubrics that PT faculty use?
      4. Ultimately look at student work as it relates to specific program outcomes and make
          adjustments as needed.

Notes from Professional Technical Meeting – Pharmacy Tech
April 21, 2008
Present: Uyen Thortensen, Susan Jong (PT faculty), Apollo Mulhauser (PT faculty), Tom
Drummond (HHS faculty), Bob Fineman, and Jane Lister Reis (staff support)

       Program learning outcomes/Program Matrix:
       The program matrix was discussed. Apollo Mulhauser stated that his course, PHA 155
       (Job Skills) definitely introduces (I) and reinforces (R) outcome #8 (display acceptable
       communication skills during interactions with patients, co-workers, and other health care
       professionals) and outcome #9 (display a professional attitude about the practice of
       pharmacy and the ability to problem solve). It was discussed that all faculty within the
       program need to complete this process so we have a finished matrix that can be used in
       program review.

       Action Identified: Have Susan Jong, Apollo Mulhauser, and Barbara Gear complete this
       assessment process for the rest of the courses in the Pharmacy Tech program: AHI 100,
       PHA 112, PHA 115, PHA 155, PHA 150, PHA 151, and PHA 155. Goal: to complete a


                                               4
    program matrix with all of the learning outcomes identified with specific courses and the
    level of teaching/learning/assessment (I/R/E) by the end of spring quarter.
    Pre-requisites:
    Uyen said that she would like to revisit the pre-requisite courses for the PT program. She
    would like to see AHI 100 (Medical Terminology) become a pre-req. Bob added that he
    would like to see AHI 100 become one of the courses that students take as part of a core
    curriculum that prepares them for a career in health care – whatever program they
    choose.

    Uyen also contacted Edmonds Community College about their pre-reqs. The group
    discussed the possibility of revising the pre-reqs to include a math course (currently
    students need only to place into Math 098), CHE 101, and Bus 236 (rather than ENG
    101).
   Assessment:
    Course Syllabi – the program faculty at the meeting decided to pull together all of the
    course syllabi from the first quarter that students take in the program. (see action item
    below)
   Capstone for students: The faculty discussed creating a comprehensive test (capstone)
    for students in the 2nd and 3rd quarter to “push” them to realizing that they must integrate
    their learning across classes rather than learn something for one class and then forget it.
    Susan stated that students needed to be told at the beginning of each class that they need
    to integrate their learning.
   Faculty discussed what would be in a comprehensive test. Faculty could submit five or so
    questions from each course. Uyen stated that Edmonds has an ending test . (Click the
    URL: http://www.edcc.edu/pharmacytech/exam2.php to see description of Edmonds
    CC’s test.)
   Faculty discussed the merits of a comprehensive test – as a good screening test prior to a
    student’s externship. Employers want students to be ready for employment immediately
    after the externship.
   Course changes: Uyen would like to combine PHA 141 and PHA 140 into one 4-credit
    course. (see action items below)
   Program Differences: Uyen noted that North’s externship experience for students is
    almost double that of other schools (which employers like).

Action Items for 08-09
   1. Collect all syllabi from courses offered in the first quarter; set meeting date to look at
       the outcomes.
   2. Create capstone course.
   3. Revise pre-reqs by Spring 2009.
   4. Combine PHA 140 and PHA into one 4-credit course.


                                             5
5. Change the passing GPA for each class to a 2.0. This change has already been
   approved by the TAC and the appropriate papers have been submitted to CAS.
6. Continue working with part-time faculty to document student learning.




                                      6

								
To top