Assessing Institutional Alignment

Report
Presented by: Dr. Gail Wells
Vice President for Academic Affairs and
Dr. Carole Beere
Associate Provost for Outreach (retired)
Northern Kentucky University
June 19, 2010
“Public engagement involves
a partnership in which there
is mutually beneficial, two-way
interaction between the
university and some entity
within the metropolitan region
or the Commonwealth.”
From: Laying the Foundation, NKU, 2006, p. 11
2
and annual performance review
and merit salary increase
Create a system that recognizes and rewards
behavior that advances each of the institution’s
mission dimensions;
 Ensure that RPT guidelines are fair and promote
quality work; and
 Develop guidelines that clarify what work is
acceptable within each of the mission dimensions, the criteria by which it will be evaluated,
what constitutes acceptable documentation, and
the process by which the documentation will be
evaluated.

4
TRADITIONAL
Teaching
Scholarship
Service
5
 Define engaged teaching
 Suggest criteria for evaluating
engaged teaching
6
“Engaged teaching refers to course- or
curriculum-related teaching/learning
activities that involve students with the
community in mutually beneficial ways.”
From: Laying the Foundation, NKU, 2006, p. 10
7
STUDENTS
 Did the students achieve the academic goals?
 Did the students develop a deep appreciation
for the course content?
 Are the students more interested in the
subject matter?
 Can the students apply what
they learned?
8

California Test of Critical Thinking Skills
http://www.insightassessment.com/testcctst.html

Center for Information and Research on
Civic Learning and Engagement
(CIRCLE)
http://www.civicyouth.org/

Others in the literature
9

California Test of Critical Thinking Skills
http://www.insightassessment.com/testcctst.html

Center for Information and Research on
Civic Learning and Engagement
(CIRCLE)
http://www.civicyouth.org/
10
Gelmon, S. B., Holland, B. A., Driscoll, A.,
Spring, A., & Kerrigan, S. (2001).
Assessing service-learning and civic
engagement: Principles and
techniques. (Rev., 3rd ed.). Providence,
RI: Campus Compact.
Surveys , interviews, focus groups, document reviews,
observations, journals, and critical incident reports
11
12
Work that satisfies the
criteria for scholarship
and is done in
partnership with the
community.
13

What are the criteria for evaluating
scholarship?
14
Relates to the faculty member’s
disciplinary expertise
 Reflects knowledge of the relevant
professional literature, theory, and best
practices
 Clear goals and objectives for the work
 Appropriate methods

15
Makes a significant contribution to the
community and/or to the knowledge
base in the discipline
 The work and the results were
documented, appropriately shared, and
evaluated
 Faculty member critically reflects on the
process and product of the work

16
Highest quality standards
Reflects intellectual rigor
Makes a significant, positive
difference in the community
Achieves agreed upon goals
17
 Define engaged service
 Suggest criteria for evaluating
engaged service
18

To the institution


To the profession/discipline
To the community
19
 Define engaged service
 Suggest criteria for evaluating
engaged service
20
Outreach
Public
Engagement
21







Role of the faculty member
Significance of the activity
Duration of the involvement
Complexity and scope of the work
Number of people who were impacted
Degree of impact
Quality of the contribution
22
Gelmon, S. B., Holland, B. A., Driscoll, A.,
Spring, A., & Kerrigan, S. (2001).
Assessing service-learning and civic
engagement: Principles and
techniques. (Rev., 3rd ed.). Providence,
RI: Campus Compact.
23
SCHOLARSHIP
24

What constitutes acceptable
documentation for engaged teaching,
engaged service, and engaged
scholarship?

How should the documentation be
presented?
25
The Academic Portfolio
Seldin, P. & Miller, J. E. (2009). The
academic portfolio: A practical guide to
documenting teaching, research, and
service. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
26

Emphasis is on how and why
 Used for personnel decisions
and self improvement
 Preparation
typically takes
15-20 hours
27

Should faculty report all work or a sample?

What about projects with long time horizon?

Should independent review be required?

Who should participate at department level?

What role should department chairs have?

What should department send to dean?

What should dean send to CAO?
28

Who should provide the independent
review?

When should the reviewer be identified?

Who will seek the review?
29

Faculty concerns about the change
 What will count?
 How will it impact me?
 When will the changes go into effect?
 Are all faculty expected to do this work?
 Are we really lowering our standards?
30

Include time for campus debate and
discussion, at the department, college, and
university level.
31
Set minimum parameters for what can
contribute to the RPT decision.
32

Encourage “double” and “triple dipping.”
33
34

Achieve a blend of consistency and
variability.
Teacher Education
35

Provide professional development.
36
Beere, C. A., Votruba, J. C., &
Wells, G. W. (2011). Becoming an
Engaged Campus: A Practical
Guide for Institutionalizing
Public Engagement. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[email protected]
[email protected]
37

similar documents