The Role of Faculty Institutes in Improving Student ... - Olympic College by xiuliliaofz


									                                                      June 2011
The Role of Faculty Institutes in Improving Student
 Learning: Summer Institute Core Abilities’ Report

Submitted by Mirelle Cohen and Minerva Holk
                               Table of Contents

Introduction ………………………………………………………... 1
Planning for the Institute ……………………………………………1
The Institute ………………………………………………………... 2
Executive Summary … ……………….……………………………. 5
The Data ……………………………….………………….………..6
Feedback from Participants …………….………………………….. 6
Recommendations ……………………….…………….……………12
Appendix I Application form……………………………………… 16
Appendix II Permission for Student Feedback……………..……… 17
Appendix III Evaluation Tool for Institute………………………….18
Appendix IV Evaluation Tool for Institute and Feedback…………..19
Appendix V Post-It Note Comments …………………………….. 22
Appendix VI Letter of Invitation …………………..………………. 23
Appendix VII Core Ability Graduation Requirement Draft of Tool...24


        The Summer Institute held June 16 and June 17, 2011 was a different format than had been used in
previous Institutes and focused on the development of assignments that would specifically address Core Abilities
or revising syllabi to include Core Abilities. There were twenty-eight participants. Twenty (71%) participants
were full-time faculty and eight (29%) were adjunct faculty. Three participants (11%) had not attended a previous
Institute. An overview of the process and the results attained will be presented, followed by recommendations for
future Institutes.

Planning for the Institute
        Course Mapping was completed for all Core Abilities in the distribution courses during the 2010/2011
academic year. A mandatory pre-Institute workshop was scheduled for one hour at the start of the first day. This
was the second time this procedure was being used based on positive feedback from the Winter 2010 Institute.
Attendance at this workshop was mandatory for all participants who had not attended an Institute previously. The
session was also open to other participants who wished to refresh their memories of the goals and procedures of
the Institute. The format for this workshop includes reviewing the history of Core Abilities at Olympic College,
reviewed the five Core Abilities, and explaining what the expectations for the two-day workshop.
        Changes were made to the activities of the Institute in response to feedback from earlier Institutes and the
approval of a graduation requirement relevant to Core Abilities in Spring quarter 2011 by the Instructional
Policies Council. The degree requirement will apply first to the associate of arts (AA) and associate of science
(AS) degrees. The Core Abilities Graduation Requirement will begin in Fall, 2012. The Core Abilities’ Co-
Chairpersons decided to spend the first part of the day discussing the graduation requirement; specifically seeking
faculty input regarding the number of classes required to satisfy the graduation requirement; the “level” of
proficiency required by students to meet the graduation requirement and follow-up discussion of suggested
strategies for implementation. The OC Core Curriculum Requirements Worksheet that had been reviewed by the
IPC was also shared with the participants with the intent of improving clarification of the form and input
regarding the implementation and utilization of the process.
        Another change to be implemented at this Institute is the requirement that participants develop or revise
an assignment incorporating Core Abilities. The faculty will be asked to share the finished assignment and student
samples for assessment at the Winter 2011 Institute. Faculty who will not be teaching the new assignment in fall
quarter have been asked to submit the assignment and ungraded samples to the Core Ability Co-Chairs following
use in the classroom. A poster board session displaying the work started in the Institutes will be included on
November 17, Olympic College’s Professional Day.
        Information regarding participants’ disciplinary affiliation and specific Core Ability interest was included
on the registration form. This information was used to arranging participants into groups that enhanced potential

for success. Faculty were asked to indicate whether a new assignment was being developed or revision of a
current assignment. Another option for faculty, who do not teach distribution courses, was a session by Mirelle
Cohen focused on integration of Core Abilities into course syllabi. Faculty selecting this option were asked to
bring a copy of their syllabus to the Institute.
        A final step in the planning for the Summer Institute 2011 was the development of a new evaluation tool
that provided more objective data (Appendix III). It is the Co-Chairpersons’ hope that this will facilitate sharing
of the information obtained at the Institutes in a way that will be more beneficial to Olympic College.

The Institute
        Upon arrival at the Institute participants were given packets of information relating to the Core Abilities.1
The documents included an agenda/schedule for the Institute, the College’s Mission Statement and Guidelines for
Assessing Core Abilities, Outcomes and Rubrics for each of the Core Abilities (Communication, Thinking,
Information Literacy and Technology, Lifelong Learning and Global Perspective), a Glossary of Terms for Core
Abilities Rubrics, a copy of the Faculty Curriculum Team Recommendation on Core Abilities and the OC Core
Curriculum Requirements Worksheet. Each participant was also given a name tag which included their name,
division, and assigned table number.
        There was representation at the Institute from four Divisions at Olympic College (See Table 1 below).
The only division not represented was Adult Basic Education/Workforce Development. Participants were
assigned to specific tables according to their stated interest in the options outlined in the invitation to participate
and complete the tasks (See Appendix I). When assigning participants to tables consideration was also given to
the amount of previous experience with Core Abilities so that the groups were as productive as possible. The
participants had been given the choice of Core Abilities that were most appropriate to the course assignments
being developed or revised. The participants had been given the opportunity to request a specific Core Ability to
work on at the Institute and several faculty chose multiple Core Abilities, all Core Abilities were included in the
choices. 2 Participants were assigned to tables in groups of four, with one group of three. The original table
assignments turned out to be appropriate although slight adjustments were made by the participants depending on
the assignments or projects under development. The Vice-President of Instruction welcomed the faculty to the
Institute and emphasized the importance of the work being done at the Institutes especially as it relates to what is
good for our students.

1 This was the same process utilized at the Winter 2010 Institute. This method was implemented because we found that most

participants had not read the materials in advance at the Summer, 2010 Institute, and more importantly, because a number of
participants did not remember to bring the packets with them to the Institute and several of the documents contained therein
were vital to the work being done during the Institute.
2 On the RSVP form, faculty were asked to indicate which of the Core Abilities they would be working on at the Institute.

Several faculty chose to work on more than one Core Ability. Faculty choices included all five Core Abilities.

        The Institute began with a discussion led by Dr. Mirelle Cohen and Dianne Moore about the graduation
requirement. An explanation of the process involved in the approval of the graduation requirement (Spring 2011)
was presented. The initial discussion involved the following questions:
        How many classes will be required to satisfy the Core Abilities’ graduation requirement? What “Level”
of proficiency will be required? Additional questions arose concerning the use of the Core Ability Rubrics in the
process and what level is appropriate for community college graduates. There were also concerns about the
expectations in the same course being taught by different faculty and how to decide if a course fulfills a Core
Ability. There continues to be some confusion regarding the perceived need for any single course to meet multiple
Core Abilities. It was clarified that it is possible that a course will meet multiple Core Abilities; it is also possible
and perhaps more likely, that one course may not meet all the Outcomes for a specific Core Ability and another
course may meet the Outcomes for multiple Core Abilities. This information is also included in the
recommendation for the Core Abilities graduation requirement put forward by the Faculty Curriculum Committee
which was approved by IPC Spring 2011. Following a brief discussion with the whole group each Table discussed
the issues individually and reported the Table’s opinion back to the group at large. Five faculty (Terri Major,
Thea Swanson, Ian Sherman, Marie Weichman, and Mirelle Cohen from Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH)
worked on integrating Core Abilities into the SSH Division’s Mission Statement.

        The discussion at large identified similarities between the current graduation requirements and the
addition of the requirement for Core Abilities. The Core Ability Communication, Outcome 2 is already
accomplished by the successful completion of the existing Written Communication Skills requirement. The
acquisition of Thinking Outcome 3 will be accomplished by the successful completion of the existing
Symbolic/Quantitative Skills requirement. Some faculty present emphasized the expectation that students earn
Core Abilities by taking multiple classes, and not that they earn all Core Abilities through one class. There was
some confusion on the current grade requirements for receiving course credit toward graduation. Clarification was
received from the Program Coordinator in Enrollment Services that students are required to earn a 2.0 GPA to
graduate with an associate degree or certificate. Several faculty recommended including the Core Abilities into
syllabi. A qualifier that was introduced for faculty consideration was the possibility of differentiating in the
syllabus whether the course satisfies a Core Ability Graduation Requirement or provides opportunity to practice
other Core Abilities. The Course Outlines are being revised to increase clarity and streamline data recording and
usage; part of the change is the inclusion of Core Abilities being addressed in the course. The decision about
whether or not a course meets a Core Ability will be determined by the IPC.

        The Tables below give the specific information according to team arrangement for the Institute.

                       Table 1: Core Abilities Summer Institute 2011

                    Table 1                                     Table 5
Cohen, Mirelle                                Manix, Pamela
Swanson, Thea                                 Moore, Dianne
Major, Terri                                  Weichman, Marie
Poole, Joyce                                  Zarnecka, Anna

                    Table 2                                     Table 6
Griffith, Suzanne                             Briggs, Elizabeth
Herman, Amy                                   Heinze, Jason
McMullen, Stern                               Holk, Minerva (Thursday only)
Triplett, Shawn                               Mulligan, Anne
                                              O’Neil, Elizabeth
                   Table 3                                      Table 7
Geyer, Cami                                   Bermea, Nancy
Frederick, Christopher                        Bilderback, Howard
Phayre, Alison                                Mackaben, Kandace
Stinson, Myong                                Westland, Mark
                    Table 4
Parker, Barbara
Sherman, Ian
Thompson, Jessica

          Table 2: Institutional Level Assessment of Core Abilities Summer Institute 2011
                                  Faculty Participant List by Division
    Business and         Mathematics,        Social Sciences        Library        Adult Basic
    Technology            Engineering,       and Humanities                   Education/Workforce
                          Sciences and                                             Development
Bermea, Nancy         Briggs, Elizabeth     Cohen, Mirelle      Herman, Amy
Bilderback, Howard Frederick,               Griffith, Suzanne Moore, Dianne
MacKaben,Kandace Geyer, Cameron             Major, Terri
Parker, Barbara       Heinze, Jason         Manix, Pamela
Poole, Joyce          Holk, Minerva         McMullen, Sterne
Westland, Mark        Mulligan, Anne        Sherman, Ian
                      O’Neil, Elizabeth     Swanson, Thea
                      Phayre, Alison        Thompson,
                      Stinson, Myong        Weichman, Marie
                      Triplett, Shawn       Zarnecka, Marie

Executive Summary
    The Core Abilities Summer Institute 2011 focused on incorporation of Core Abilities into syllabi and
development of assignments specific to Core Abilities as identified in the Olympic College master plan for Core
Ability development and assessment.
       Information Literacy and Technology
            o   Graduates use strategies to search for information that enhance the acquisition of knowledge.
            o   Graduates evaluate and appraise sources.
            o   Graduates access and use information and/or technology ethically, legally and/or responsibly.
            o   Graduates use various inquiry tools and different formats of information e.g. media.
            o   Graduates use technology and information appropriate to field or discipline, synthesizing
                information appropriate to field or discipline, synthesizing information to formulate insights and
                create knowledge.
       Thinking
            o   Graduates engage in critical analysis.
            o   Graduates engage in creative problem solving.
            o   Graduates engage in quantitative reasoning.
       Lifelong Learning
            o   Outcome 1: Graduates demonstrate self-monitoring and self-advocacy skills to effect positive life
            o   Outcome 2: Graduates demonstrate the ability to recognize, understand, and accept ownership for
                their own learning and behavior in varied and changing environments.
            o   Outcome 3: Graduates demonstrate the ability to adapt to technological innovations and to
                understand their implications.
       Global Perspective
            o   Outcome 1: Graduates demonstrate an understanding of their own culture and the framework
                upon which their society has been built.
            o Graduates demonstrate an understanding of how cultural differences (e.g. beliefs,
                traditions, communications, norms) shape human interaction and perceptions of others.
            o   Outcome 3: Graduates demonstrate that they are aware of, and understand world events (e.g.
                religious, historical, environmental, political economic) and the role of human decisions and
                physical conditions shaping these events and their outcomes.
            o   Outcome 4: Graduates demonstrate an understanding of their own region/bioregion and recognize
                that other parts of the world are different in both physical and human attributes.

            o Outcome 5: Graduates demonstrate an understanding of universal processes involving
                 both distribution and circulation of resources and their byproducts; e.g., wealth, food,
                 water, oil, gases, energy and pollutants.
       Communication
            o Graduates understand and produce effective oral communication.
            o Graduates understand and produce effective written communication.
            o Graduates understand and use effective non-verbal communication skills.

        The faculty members who attended the Institute were energized by the process and expressed renewed
enthusiasm for integrating Core Abilities into their classrooms and reviewing their assignments to improve their
clarity and usefulness vis-à-vis the integration of Core Abilities.
        The Summer Institute was helpful to faculty present in making definitive progress in the next steps
toward more explicit integration of Core Abilities into their curriculum. Faculty shared examples of the work they
have accomplished and arrangements were made to share the tools developed with others in attendance. Several
participants mentioned that all members of the faculty, including those not present, would benefit greatly from
regular forums where rubrics and assessment tools are discussed, shared, analyzed, and critiqued.

Feedback from Participants
        An Institute Evaluation Form was distributed at the end of the second day. Evaluation forms were
received from 21 of the 28 participants. The Core Ability Co-Chairs did not complete the evaluation tool. This
evaluation tool and a complete list of the comments received are included in Appendix III. As well, Post-it Notes
were placed on every table and participants were encouraged to write suggestions and comments throughout the
Institute. The Post it notes were collected several times during the first day and only one Post it Note was
received on day two of the Institute. For a full list of the Post-it notes comments see Appendix V.
        The recommendations below are based on information gleaned from the Institute Evaluation Form, the
Post-it Notes, observations made during the Institute by the two Coordinators, and data derived from the rating
sheets. The process of determining the best way to assess accomplishment of the Core Abilities and our students’
learning is on-going.




 12                                                                                            2
  8                                                                                            4
  6                                                                                            5



               LibGuide                ANGEL E-Rubric          Core Abilities in Syllabus

Question 1: Projected Tool Use

        The first question on the Institute Evaluation Form asked faculty to rate the likelihood that
tools/information gained at the Institute would be implemented. A Likert scale was used from one (not likely) to
five (highly likely). The number of evaluation forms received was twenty-two. The LibGuide received seventeen
scores at three or above, with eight choosing highly likely. The inclusion of Core Abilities into the syllabi
received eighteen scores of five, with a total of 21 from three and one half to five points. It is exciting to see the
potential for incorporation of Core Abilities into the courses.









            One class            Two classes            Three classes             Other

Question 2: Number of classes required to satisfy GR for CA
        Faculty were asked to indicate the number of classes that should be required to satisfy the graduation
requirement for Core Ability. The options the faculty could select from included one class, two classes, three
classes or other. No faculty selected the option of one class or no opinion. The responses ranged from two (N=14)
to three (N=7). Faculty, who chose the “other” option, were asked to supply the desired number to be required.
One faculty member selected the option “other” and qualified it with two to three, depending on the discipline.
The specific disciplines and suggestions were not included.





                                                                                          Faculty Number: 15
                                                                                          Faculty Number: 16


          One            Two            66% of          60% of           Other
        Outcome        Outcomes        Outcomes        Outcomes

Question 3: Outcomes required for course to satisfy Core Ability GR

        When asked to select the number of Outcomes required for a Core Ability to satisfy that a course meets a
particular Core Ability; the majority selected the options of two or more. The use of percentages was the most
popular option with six faculty choosing sixty-six percent and three faculty choosing sixty percent. The difference
in the percentage choice was due to some Core Abilities having three Outcomes (Thinking, Lifelong Learning and
Communication) and others having five (Information Literacy and Technology and Global Perspective). Two
additional comments were received from faculty. The first was that three Outcomes should be required for each
Core Ability with the exception of Lifelong Learning; no reason was given to support this statement. The second
comment received was that all Outcomes should be required for courses identified as meeting the Thinking and
Communication Core Abilities and three of five Outcomes for the other Core Abilities.
        Faculty were asked whether students should be required to acquire a “Level” of proficiency in a given
course to meet the graduation requirement. There was an even split for yes and no, with one undecided. This is a
topic that will need considerably more discussion from the faculty in general. If a level of proficiency is desired, it
will be necessary to determine an equitable way of assessing proficiency as that was not the intent of the original
rubrics developed for the Core Abilities. Faculty who responded yes to a required proficiency “Level” were asked
to identify the “Level” on a follow-up question. The same terms for proficiency levels were used as have been
adopted for the Core Ability Assessment Rubrics: emerging, developing, competent or strong. Six of ten faculty
who answered this question chose developing. The second most frequent choice was competent. During the open
discussion at the Institute, there was vigorous input about expectations for the community college student as

compared to the four year college/university student. One consideration that was put forward was that it may not
be realistic for a student to achieve the competent or strong level in a two year college. There are others who
disagree and perhaps it is a philosophical point that needs to be addressed in future discussions. The Table below
shows the distribution of responses for the question about proficiency.

                              Faculty Level Choices


 3                                                                                    Competent


         Emerging          Developing          Competent            Strong

Questions 4 and 5: Required Proficiency Levels for CA

        The question was asked concerning Core Abilities being tied to a grade requirement. Nineteen faculty
responses were received and eleven yes, 0.7 or higher, with a cumulative GPA of 2.0. Two faculty selected the
other option and shared the following comments: A 2.0 in classes with 0.7 to pass and the passing grade should be
raised to 1.0. The passing grade for courses in the community college system is determined by higher authorities
and not something that will be addressed by the Core Ability Co-Chairs. One respondent said this option would be
too complicated. To be successful, the actualizing of the graduation requirement will require a simple method of
tracking. There are ongoing discussions regarding implementation and streamlining the process for the students
and faculty.

                                                                                                       10 | P a g e
                                             Faculty choices


                                                                                             No, 0.7
                                                                                             Yes, specify
                                                                                             Yes, > 0.7

          4                                                                                  Other


                   No, 0.7         Yes, specify        Yes, > 0.7           Other

Tie Core Abilities to Grade Requirement

        Summer Institute 2011 was the first Institute to provide availability of the Course Mapping Database and
the Course Outline Database. This was rated highly by the participants and will be included in future Institutes as
appropriate. See Table below:

                             Helpfulness of Databases



 10                                                                            Strongly Disagree
  6                                                                            Strongly Agree

  4                                                                            Other


        Strongly      Disagree       Agree        Strongly      Other
        Disagree                                   Agree

Helpfulness of Course Outlines and Course Outlines Databases

                                                                                                          11 | P a g e
        As a result of the Institute the Co-Chairpersons would like to put forth recommendations for Olympic
College as well as for future Faculty Institutes. For those who have read Institute Reports before, you will see
some that are repeated. This is intentional as we work toward actualizing the incorporation of Core Abilities into
our student assessments and accomplishment of the College’s mission.

    1. Make explicit the link between this work and Olympic College’s accreditation by the Northwest
        Commission on College and Universities (NWCCU) and what accreditation really means to Olympic
        It remains evident that some faculty members do not see or understand the link between the work being
        done on Outcomes and the stipulations placed on the College by our regional accrediting commission. It
        needs to be reiterated that this work is ongoing and required, not short-term or optional.

    2. Streamline sample collection – add stipend?
        Submitting the samples takes a significant amount of time and effort on the part of the faculty member.
        The process involves obtaining student permission to use the work, make copies of the samples before
        grading because graded samples cannot be used, randomly select samples, complete the cover sheet, make
        a copy of the assignment prompt and then deliver the documents to the person in charge of collecting
        them. Timing is another challenge for faculty as the time that samples are more available coincides with
        busier times of the quarter for faculty. If rating samples remains a cornerstone of Outcomes Assessment
        at Olympic College, and a broad range of samples is desired, other tactics need to be employed to solicit
        samples. Perhaps a small stipend or some other incentive, such as a voucher for a free lunch at the OC
        cafeteria might be considered.

    3. Are stipends key to the continuation of this work?
        Faculty consistently report on the feedback survey that they would not continue participating in the
        Institutes if a stipend were not offered. Thus, it is important that funding continues to be available if
        faculty participation is to continue and if progress on Core Abilities is to continue in the future.

    4. Reiterate to faculty that having their courses meet several or most of the Core Abilities is not necessarily
        “better” in the eyes of the Administration or the Faculty Curriculum Team.
        From the comments made at the Institute it is clear that some faculty members are still unclear about the
        purpose of the mapping database and the implications of the entries made in the database. Even though
        this thinking persists, it seems to be decreasing.

                                                                                                         12 | P a g e
5. Strategize how to ensure congruency between the course outlines and course mapping information
    One of the next steps for the Faculty Curriculum Team is to consider how faculty will most effectively
    access and use the information contained in the Mapping Database when reviewing existing curriculum
    and when developing new curriculum. Work on the Course Outline Forms was scheduled to be done
    during summer 2011, with intent to streamline the process and incorporate Core Abilities into the
    appropriate courses. Another factor is to consolidate the activities required for faculty in the process and
    to make the information obtained more usable. We need to explain, again, the importance of accurately
    mapping courses and the process for determining accomplishment of Core Ability credit in relation to
    graduation requirements.

6. Actively engage the Divisions and IPC in identifying courses that meet Core Abilities and the degree to
    which identified courses address all the Outcomes for the specific Core Ability
    This may be helped by the new Course Outline Form and the implementation of a subgroup of IPC
    review the courses and make recommendations to IPC for approval. A suggestion for the subcommittee
    members would be the Division Deans and the respective IPC Division representatives. It is thought that
    this would address the concern expressed by some faculty that content experts need to make the decision
    that the course offered meets the Core Abilities identified. Another benefit of this is that it decreases the
    amount of time required by the IPC to review the courses at the scheduled meetings. This would provide
    information to the division that would identify areas where there are gaps in the course maps and develop
    new assignments or classes to close the gaps. For the Winter Institute 2011, the plan is to review the
    samples from assignments developed at the Summer Institute 2011. A previous recommendation involved
    helping a colleague rework an assignment after it has been rated. Doing a pre-Institute Faculty Survey
    may be necessary to determine interest in this option.

7. Feedback to faculty who submit samples needs further consideration
    At future Institutes when samples are assessed further consideration needs to be given to the sort of
    feedback that is possible and the sort of feedback that would be most useful for faculty. At this point, the
    data collected allows us to illustrate how well an assignment provides the opportunity for a student to
    demonstrate mastery of a Core Ability. It is possible to compare how an assignment was rated at the
    Institute with how the faculty submitting the sample rated the assignment. It would be worthwhile asking
    faculty who submit samples, and request feedback, what they hope to learn from the rating process and
    what kind of data would be most helpful to them as they work on refining their materials. This
    information needs to be obtained earlier to plan for the Institute and coordinate expectations.

                                                                                                      13 | P a g e
   8. Incorporating Core Abilities work into Angel
       With an increasing number of faculty members using Angel, it is important that we work closely with
       Kathy Bright, Faculty Support for eLearning, to widely disseminate her work on integrating the Core
       Abilities into the Angel platform.

   9. Utilizing data collected at the Institutes
       The Faculty Curriculum Team should clarify for the faculty at large why and how data is collected at the
       Institutes, how the data collected relates to the Core Abilities and the rubrics, and how such data could be
       used to inform any decisions pertaining to significant changes to the curriculum.

   10. Departmental Concern regarding Course Outcomes
       The Institute Evaluation Forms as well as some discussion during the Institute indicate a possible
       departmental concern. There is a desire among those present at the Institute that Course Outcomes are
       clearly articulated and correct. It is possible that the correctness will be taken care of with the course
       review that occurs every five years. Given that some faculty present had not seen their Course Outlines
       previously, there may be value in reviewing the manner in which this information is communicated to
       new faculty.

   11. Develop and finalize the format for determining which course(s) meet which Core Ability(ies)
       The OC Core Curriculum Requirements Worksheet was reviewed at the Institute and is an excellent start
       for the development of a tool to track the progress of students toward accomplishment of the newly
       approved graduation requirement. Faculty from each discipline need to become involved in the process to
       develop a tool that will be useful and used by all of us.

      The interest that continues to be demonstrated in the Institutes is encouraging. Fourteen of

seventeen respondents on the evaluation tool indicated that the Summer Institute 2011 was a worthwhile

endeavor and would participate in a similar event in the future. The integration of Core Abilities is

increasing and the process for development and implementation is ongoing. The assessment of specific

assignments directed at improving students’ competence in Core Abilities is anticipated at the Winter

                                                                                                         14 | P a g e
2011 Institute. The co-chairpersons for Core Abilities look forward to reviewing samples at the Winter

Institute that were worked on during the Summer Institute.

                                                                                            15 | P a g e
                                                    Appendix I

         Application to Participate in
       The Core Abilities Summer Institute
                                            Summer 2011
 _____ YES, I would like to participate as part of a team   in Institutional Level Analysis and
                            Curriculum Development tied to Core Abilities.

As part of this process, I agree to engage with other faculty in collaborative discussion and
curriculum development on Thursday, June 16th from 10-4pm and Friday, June 17th from 9am-
3pm in ST124/6. There will be a mandatory Pre-Institute Workshop for first time participants
from 9am to 10am on Thursday June 16.
I understand I will receive a $400 stipend for participating in this entire two-day process.

            To apply, please respond to this e-mail ( by Friday, May 6, 2011

Faculty Name: __________________________

Discipline: ______________________

Division: ________________

Do you work full-time or part-time at OC: ________________

Please check this box if this is your first time attending a Core Abilities Institute: ___

Your assignment will be: Development ___          or       Review ___

Which core ability will the learning outcomes of the assignment correspond to (check all that apply):
       Communication___          Global Perspective____
       Information Literacy and Technology___           Lifelong Learning___ Thinking___

 There is limited funding for stipends so please reply early for your best chance to participate. An effort will be
     made to include faculty (full and part-time) representing all of the various divisions as well as first time
                                         All faculty are encouraged to apply.
  Priority will be given to faculty who teach classes in the distribution areas and who submit an assignment for
                           revision or an idea for an assignment that you wish to develop.

                                                                                                       16 | P a g e
                                                Appendix II

                             PERMISSION TO USE STUDENT WORK

Quarter & Year:                                               Instructor:

As indicated by my signature below, I authorize Olympic College to use my work as part of one or more
Olympic College activities that are specific to campus-wide assessment for student learning outcomes.
Your name and other identifying information will be removed.

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

PRINT NAME _________________________________________ SIGN NAME_____________________________________

                                                                                                17 | P a g e
                                                Appendix III

                            Core Abilities Summer Institute 2011 Evaluation Form

1. Rate the likelihood that you will use the tools/information gained at the Institute, 1(not likely) to 5
   (highly likely).

                LibGuide                  1.          2.         3.          4.          5.
                ANGEL E-Rubric            1.          2.         3.          4.          5.
                Core Abilities in         1.          2.         3.          4.          5.

2. Select the number of classes that you think should be required to satisfy the graduation requirement
   per core ability:
   □1 □2 □3          □ other, fill in desired number: _______ □ No opinion

3. Select the number of Outcomes that you believe should be required to satisfy that a course meets a
   Core Ability:
           a. One per course
           b. Two per course
           c. 66% of the Outcomes in Core Abilities that have 3 (2 of 3)
           d. 60% of the Outcomes possible per the Core Ability (3 of 5)
           e. Other, please add: _________________________________

4.   Should students be required to acquire a “Level” of proficiency meet the graduation requirement?
     Check one: ____Yes       ____No

5. If you answered yes to the previous question, circle the “Level” of proficiency that should be required.
           a. Emerging        b. Developing           c. Competent             d. Strong

6. Should the core abilities be tied to a grade requirement?
          a. No; would still need to meet current requirement of 0.7
          b. Yes, please specify ______
          c. Yes, 0.7 or higher, with average GPA of 2.0
          d. Other: ______________________________________________________

7. It was helpful to have the Course Outlines and Course Mapping Database available during the Institute.
   □ Strongly disagree □ Disagree □ Agree        □ Strongly Agree □ No opinion

8. Do you believe this event was a worthwhile endeavor?
   □ Strongly disagree □ Disagree □ Agree       □ Strongly Agree □ No opinion

9. Would you participate in a similar event in the future?
   □ Strongly disagree □ Disagree □ Agree         □ Strongly Agree □ No opinion

10. What additional training and/or information would help you better understand the Core Abilities and
    the process set up to assess them?

                                                                                                  18 | P a g e
                                               Appendix IV

            Core Abilities (CA) Summer Institute 2011 Evaluation Form and Feedback

                                      Institute Evaluation Responses

Each evaluation form is identified with a letter to allow comparison of comments on successive
questions. All of the participant written responses have been included and are quoted as written. If the
question was unanswered this is denoted as NR.

             Note: Answers were typed verbatim including spelling and grammatical errors.

2. Rate the likelihood that you will use the tools/information gained at the Institute, 1(not likely) to 5
   (highly likely).

               LibGuide               2. (3)      3. (2)     6. (5)      7. (3)     8. (8)
               ANGEL E-Rubric         6. (5)      7. (1)     8. (5)      9. (4)     10. (6)
               Core Abilities in      1. (0)      6. (0)     7. (0)      8. (2)     9. (19)

Note: 1 participant chose between #3 and #4 for LibGuide and CA in syllabi

9. Select the number of classes that you think should be required to satisfy the graduation requirement
   per core ability:
   □ 1 (0) □ 2 (13) □ 3 (8)      □ other, fill in desired number: (1*)_______ □ No opinion (0)
                                                             *2-3 depends on discipline

10. Select the number of Outcomes that you believe should be required to satisfy that a course meets a
    Core Ability:
            f. One per course (4)
            g. Two per course (6)
            h. 66% of the Outcomes in Core Abilities that have 3 (2 of 3) (4)
            i. 60% of the Outcomes possible per the Core Ability (3 of 5) (2)
            j. Other, please add: _________________________________ (2)
                Other comments:
    2 people said: all for thinking and communication and 3 for each except LLL
                Note: 3 people selected C&D
                Comment: I think that outcomes should be broken down to their outcomes for graduation
                requirement so that satisfaction of each outcome can be tracked otherwise what’s the
                point of the outcomes? I think that graduation req’t {requirement} should be phased in
                terms of each outcome via a check-off sheet (This comment copied verbatim!)

11. Should students be required to acquire a “Level” of proficiency meet the graduation requirement?
    Check one: __(9)__Yes _(9)___No (1) Undecided

                                                                                                19 | P a g e
12. If you answered yes to the previous question, circle the “Level” of proficiency that should be
            b. Emerging (1) b. Developing (6)        c. Competent (3)       d. Strong (0)

13. Should the core abilities be tied to a grade requirement?
           e. No; would still need to meet current requirement of 0.7 (6) 1 write-in comment: other
               options are too complicated
           f. Yes, please specify ______ (1) Comment: 2.0
           g. Yes, 0.7 or higher, with average GPA of 2.0 (11)
           h. Other: ______________________________________________________ (2)
               Comments: 2.0 overall in CA classes with 0.7 to pass any single class
               Passing grade should be raised to 1.0

14. It was helpful to have the Course Outlines and Course Mapping Database available during the
    □ Strongly disagree (2) □ Disagree (0) □ Agree (2)      □ Strongly Agree (19) □ No opinion (0)

15. Do you believe this event was a worthwhile endeavor?
    □ Strongly disagree (0) □ Disagree (0) □ Agree (3)        □ Strongly Agree (19) □ No opinion (0)

10. Would you participate in a similar event in the future?
    □ Strongly disagree (1) □ Disagree (0) □ Agree (2)      □ Strongly Agree (14) □ No opinion (1)
    Comment from “no opinion”: Depends on agenda and specific dates.

11. What additional training and/or information would help you better understand the Core Abilities and
    the process set up to assess them?

     Every one of these core abilities workshops are enlightening and worthwhile. I always learn
      something new even if I experience some confusion and anxiety. I prefer to work as a group to
      accomplish institution outcomes vs. having to produce my own work that shows what I have
      accomplished. Rather than working collectively, I found myself working in isolation to
      accomplish the workshop outcomes. I like coming and working with colleagues across
      disciplines and I didn’t spend much time doing that this time.

     I feel that I have learned today was very helpful, especially about LibGuides and Angel. At this
      time I am not sure what additional training would be useful. I would love to come in December.

     More discussion re: graduation requirement

     This is very helpful. I didn’t understand what we did before. Now we have more examples and
      visual guides which helped me.

     I think a general overview of the Core Abilities, the mapping, the course-level use/integration for
      new or “unaware” faculty followed by discussion of grad. requirement

                                                                                              20 | P a g e
   More rubric online info (Outcomes Assessment will provide a seminar during opening days)
    More examples of mapping >course outline>syllabi> assignment

   It is a slow process. More information on how data assessment could be computerized. More
    info/help on setting up the Angel rubric

   It’s already a good process; well-structured, at least as much as possible for something still in
    flux. Thanks for the work!

   Would like to participate in Winter

   The course outlines and comparison to course maps would be a very useful discussion for all
    divisions/departments prior to the next workshop/institute

   Departmental concern: course outcomes correctly/clearly articulated? course outcomes clearly
    tied to core abilities? mapped for those courses?

   Only allow 1 CA to apply per class even if mapped for more.

                                                                                            21 | P a g e
                                                   Appendix V

   Post its Day 1, June 16, 2011

   •   Include online discussion under outcome #1, Communications

   •   How will we use these on transfer students or AP classes?

   •   Are they grandfathered into the old system?

   •   If we require students to hit the Core Abilities over 2-3 disciplines that can help ensure that
       students hit multiple outcomes within the Core Ability

   •   Mapping workshop on Opening/Professional Day

   •   Course outlines do not have Core Abilities on them; what is in Outcomes are course level
       outcomes not Core Abilities (eg) Engl 102

   •   Advising needs to address computer skills @ beginning

   •   One more complication is that outcomes of classes have to be considered when classes are
       offered (times & days)

   •   Why is there no overall GPA req for grad?

   •   Electives: stress mapping for other classes- unrestricted electives can be done on our
       “professional” day

   •   All of the performance indicators, outcome assessments, and grades for courses can be assessed
       and maintained by the college in a database. Then it can be analyzed and monitored by the
       college but does not necessarily need to be student facing information.

   •   All sub-order points to the core abilities should be mapped & back screened for advisors &

Post its day 2, June 17, 2011

      I think it’s important to clarify to faculty that expect student to earn core abilities by taking multiple
       classes, & not expect that they earn all C.A.s thru one class.

                                                                                                         22 | P a g e
                                               APPENDIX __VI_
                              Invitation Letter to Faculty for Summer Institute

Dear Colleagues,

1. Discussion and Analysis: To discuss the new graduation requirement and do some work on how this
can/should be operationalized. Questions such as the following will be considered: How many classes are
needed to satisfy the graduation requirement and what "level" a student would need to demonstrate for
the class to count towards the graduation requirement.

2. Curriculum Development: In response to multiple requests at previous institutes, we would like to give
faculty the opportunity to work on one of their assignments in order to further develop or modify it so that it
more closely reflects a specific Core Ability.

Because this work will be undertaken on non-contractual days we will be offering a $400 stipend for
participating in the entire 2-day workshop. There are 32 spaces available and priority will be given to
faculty who submit an assignment to work on during the workshop. As well, because the new graduation
requirement is presently limited to distribution classes, priority will be given to faculty who submit
assignments from classes that meet distribution requirements.

If you would like to participate please complete the attached RSVP to Mirelle by Friday May 6th. Please be
sure to submit the current assignment or an outline of a new assignment that you plan to work on,
along with your RSVP.

We look forward to seeing you at the Institute,

Mirelle and Minerva.

                                                                                                  23 | P a g e
OC Core Curriculum                                                                                                                             Core Abilities
Requirements Worksheet                                                                                                                        Requirements:



                                                                                                                                                             Lifelong Learning

                                                                                                Global Perspective
                                                                                                                     Information Literacy &
                                                  Credit   Course
                                                  Hours:   Number:
Skill Area Requirements:
Written Communication Skills (ENGL101)            hours
Written Communication Skills (ENGL102 or 235)     hours
Quantitative Skills (5 hours for AA, 15 for AS)   hours
Distribution Requirements:
Humanities (15 hours)                             hours
Social Sciences (15 hours)                        hours
Natural Sciences (15 hours)                       hours

                                                                                                                                              24 | P a g e

                      25 | P a g e

To top