Sharing Another Example of a Learning Improvement Journey: Improving Computational Skills in Physics Graduates
Faculty Advisor Name
Dr. Keston Fulcher
Department
Department of Graduate Psychology
Description
In recent years, policymakers have raised the question, “What is the value of a college education?” This question has appeared largely for two reasons: (1) increasing college tuition rates, and (2) a lack of clear evidence of learning provided by institutions. In response to this call, accreditation organizations have begun calling on universities for tighter assessment of student learning outcomes and evidence of student learning improvement. At James Madison University, one way in which the call for student learning improvement is being addressed is through a program called Learning Improvement by Design (LID). Underlying LID is a three-step model: Program Learning (a) Assessment, (b) Intervention, and (c) Re-assessment (PLAIR). This innovative effort brings together assessment and faculty development expertise alongside faculty subject matter expertise. One of the initial projects was with JMU’s Computer Information Systems program (Lending et al., 2018). From this successful project we learned that assessment and faculty development were not just two pillars on which learning improvement rests, but in reality are much more interconnected.
What we can learn from both assessment and faculty development is that these two processes do not occur in silos or in phases - one after the other. When considering PLAIR, it is easy to fall into the mindset that assessment occurs at steps 1 and 3, and faculty development occurs at step 2. On the contrary, both assessment and faculty development are important to consider at each step of the process. In this paper we will share another improvement story which applied the PLAIR model in the Physics department at JMU. However we will highlight and make more explicit the importance and value of considering both assessment and faculty development at each step of the process.
This paper will share the story of how the Physics department began their improvement journey with identifying an area in which their graduating students were not meeting expectations. Following this identification, faculty from the Physics department partnered with JMU’s Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS) and the Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI) to begin the LID process. The first steps taken involved laying groundwork for the PLAIR model; new student learning outcomes were written and a test created to assess student achievement of those outcomes. With the groundwork laid, the PLAIR model could then be enacted. Finally, in addition to the successes experienced, this paper will also discuss the difficulties and challenges encountered on this LID project.
Sharing Another Example of a Learning Improvement Journey: Improving Computational Skills in Physics Graduates
In recent years, policymakers have raised the question, “What is the value of a college education?” This question has appeared largely for two reasons: (1) increasing college tuition rates, and (2) a lack of clear evidence of learning provided by institutions. In response to this call, accreditation organizations have begun calling on universities for tighter assessment of student learning outcomes and evidence of student learning improvement. At James Madison University, one way in which the call for student learning improvement is being addressed is through a program called Learning Improvement by Design (LID). Underlying LID is a three-step model: Program Learning (a) Assessment, (b) Intervention, and (c) Re-assessment (PLAIR). This innovative effort brings together assessment and faculty development expertise alongside faculty subject matter expertise. One of the initial projects was with JMU’s Computer Information Systems program (Lending et al., 2018). From this successful project we learned that assessment and faculty development were not just two pillars on which learning improvement rests, but in reality are much more interconnected.
What we can learn from both assessment and faculty development is that these two processes do not occur in silos or in phases - one after the other. When considering PLAIR, it is easy to fall into the mindset that assessment occurs at steps 1 and 3, and faculty development occurs at step 2. On the contrary, both assessment and faculty development are important to consider at each step of the process. In this paper we will share another improvement story which applied the PLAIR model in the Physics department at JMU. However we will highlight and make more explicit the importance and value of considering both assessment and faculty development at each step of the process.
This paper will share the story of how the Physics department began their improvement journey with identifying an area in which their graduating students were not meeting expectations. Following this identification, faculty from the Physics department partnered with JMU’s Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS) and the Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI) to begin the LID process. The first steps taken involved laying groundwork for the PLAIR model; new student learning outcomes were written and a test created to assess student achievement of those outcomes. With the groundwork laid, the PLAIR model could then be enacted. Finally, in addition to the successes experienced, this paper will also discuss the difficulties and challenges encountered on this LID project.
