Kaua‘i community college
Yüklə 1,69 Mb.
|
Self EvaluationKCC is putting into place a formal mechanism to measure the effectiveness of delivery systems and modes of instruction. The college believes that CAF forms will provide an important measure of effectiveness. Each completed CAF form is presented to the division. Suggestions are considered and the form is approved before submission to the Curriculum Committee. The Committee may offer more suggestions. Once the revised CAF obtains committee approval, the form is then submitted to the Dean of Instruction who may send it back to the committee and instructor for further revision or approves it and sends it to the chancellor who may also raise concerns. The chancellor’s approval is necessary before the course is approved and can be scheduled for offering. Every division is required each year to move 20 percent of their courses to the new CAF form. By the year 2010, the college will have moved all of its courses onto the CAF. As mentioned above, a significant part of the CAF includes SLOs. Divisions write program SLOs that map to the institution’s SLOs, while instructors map their own SLOs to program SLOs (Course Tracking Form) Division members give first approval to each CAF before the form is sent to the Curriculum Committee. Prior to developing a distance-delivered course, an instructor must seek approval from the KCC Distance Learning Committee. If there is a demonstrated need for the course to be offered systemwide, then the instructor completes the Curriculum Committee approval process. The latter committee discusses delivery systems and modes of instruction when they consider submitted CAF forms. The committee may request information from the division representative to explain how a particular system and/or mode are suitable to the course. Conclusions and recommendations are shared with division chairs as well as other faculty. Further, delivery methods and modes of instruction are evaluated for their effectiveness in meeting student needs through instructor and course evaluations. Faculty up for promotion may request peer evaluations. Courses taught by probationary faculty are evaluated each semester. One primary evaluation is the “Student Evaluation of Instructor and Course.” Students taking distance courses can submit evaluations on line. Statements students respond to in completing the “Student Evaluation of Instructor and Course” include: “Course objectives… were clearly explained in the syllabus at the beginning, and by the instructor throughout the semester”; “The instructor uses effective teaching methods to present course material”; “Out-of-class activities (projects, papers, homework, etc.) are helpful, and relate to the course objectives”; “Tests and examinations are fair, and relate to the course objectives.” Peers and the Dean of Instruction also evaluate probationary instructors. Instructors receive these evaluations after the conclusion of the semester and are then asked to address areas in which they can improve as suggested by the evaluations. These evaluations include information on delivery methods. Student and peer evaluations are shared with instructors (Exhibit II-8: Student and Peer evaluation forms). Every two years KCC participates in the nation-wide Community College Student Survey Evaluation (CCSSE). In 2004, the most recent survey, 100 KCC students were surveyed. The results of the survey are kept in the Institutional Researcher’s Office. Survey questions/statements and the student responses elicited relevant to our survey here include:
16 percent of students responded “Very Often” or “Often.”
family member,” 93 percent replied “Yes.”
Evaluations generated by CCSSE are shared at convocation and in some division meetings. The CCSSE survey results (Exhibit I-8: CCSSE Reports) offer an opportunity for faculty to consider their delivery systems and modes of instruction. However, no formal effort has yet been made to encourage faculty to use these results to improve instruction. In regard to Career and Technical Education, community advisory committees consult with instructors to help them stay up to date with the latest methods, including delivery methods and modes of instruction. Some KCC programs have a Cooperative Education component that provides direct feedback. Examples of programs that utilize co-op placement include Hospitality, Office Administration Technology, Accounting, Auto Body Repair and Automotive Repair. Although it does not have a formal cooperative placement program, Nursing places its students in local clinics and hospitals and relies on community health professionals to provide professional feedback to students and to faculty. Culinary Arts’ students are required to participate in numerous community events that offer opportunities to work alongside and get feedback and instruction from professional chefs. There are external certification programs for certain programs. Students must pass rigorous examinations in order to become certified and thus eligible for professional employment. Nursing students take the NCLEX; CISCO certifies students who will be working in the electronics and computer networking fields, while the NATEF End of Program Examination is administered to automotive students. Effectiveness of instruction for AA degree graduates can be examined by studying their success in transferring to 4-year institutions. A recent research study shows that our graduates or transfers did as well GPA-wise as incoming Manoa freshmen and third-year students who started at UH Manoa (Transfer, Enrollment and Performance UHCC AA Graduates). Another way the college considers the effectiveness of delivery methods and modes of instruction is through student achievement data for some math and English courses. This includes course passing rates and retention. Student achievement in a second course that has a pre-requisite is another measure of course effectiveness. At this time the Math 22/Math 24 courses is equivocal. Former Math 22 students had a 57.9 percent successful completion rate in Math 24 compared to 74.24 percent for those who tested into Math 24. Math 24 doesn’t seem to be preparing students better for Math 25 in comparison with the students who test into Math 25. Former English 18/19 students going into English 22 had a 66.7 percent completion rate in English 22 as opposed to 74.29 percent completion rate for those who tested into the course (Course Completion to Spring 2005). The college recognizes that student achievement data, i.e. grades, is not enough. This is at best an indirect measurement of effectiveness. If there is a clear connection between assessment through the use of SLOs and grades this will become a measure of effectiveness. Exactly how this will work is to be determined. The assessment of SLOs is part of the current college dialogue. However, vocational courses, such as those offered to students in Business Technology (BTEC) and Automotive Mechanics Technology (AMT), typically measure specific competencies, and therefore they have built-in assessment measures. BTEC students, for example, must demonstrate typing speeds and the ability to correctly format memos. The AMT program is built on the standards specified by the National Automotive Technicians Education Foundation (NATEF). Students must demonstrate the ability to, for example, repair engines and heating and air-conditioning systems. In the annually conducted University of Hawai‘i Community College (UHCC) e-learn pre and post-survey, students across the community college system including KCC are asked to discuss their experiences with distance courses. In the 2004 survey, 782 students responded to questions including: “What is the primary reason you decided to take distance learning class(es)?” Seventy-three percent of the students responded that their primary reason was “Scheduling and Convenience.” When asked, “What is your feeling about your distance learning class now (at the beginning of the semester)?” Forty-two percent responded that they were “excited and looking forward to it.” In the post survey, 599 students responded. They were asked, “Will you take another online or distance learning course in the future?” Sixty-seven percent responded in the affirmative. Asked if they “would recommend this course to my friends?” Sixty-seven percent of the students said they would. When asked, “How well designed was the course?” Sixty percent of the students responded “Very Well.” Since we are unable to separate KCC students from all of the UHCC students in this survey we cannot make any conclusions specific to KCC student satisfaction. However, these statistics clearly show that the majority of students taking distance learning courses across the system are satisfied with those courses. In regards to completion rates for different delivery systems, on-campus courses and the same courses offered distance, the KCC “Course Completion Review: Fall 1998-Spring 2005” reports: Nursing 121 221 of 247 on-campus students passed, 89.4% 61 of 80 distance education students passed, 76.2%. Nursing 259 has only been offered distance, 79 of 101 passed, 78.2%.
4 of 4 distance education students passed, 100%. English 251 34 of 39 on-campus students passed, 87.1% 16 of 16 distance education students passed, 100%. English 252 35 of 37 on-campus students passed, 94.5% 10 of 12 distance education students passed, 83.3%. Information and 495 of 641 on-campus students passed, 77.2% Computer 159 of 239 distance education students passed, 66.5%. Science 100
Computer 59 of 76 distance education students passed, 77.6% Science 101 Passing here is considered letter grades A, B, C, and D. Not passing is considered F, N, and L-Audit (KCC Catalog, pages 46-47). The above does not include students who withdrew from the course sometime during the semester. Yüklə 1,69 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|