|
|||||
|
Development
Spring 2006: The QEP Steering Committee was given the charge to craft an RFP (call for QEP pre-proposals) to be sent to the colleges, schools, and non-academic units to solicit submissions for initiatives to be incorporated into the QEP. During the spring 2006 semester, the QEP Steering Committee sent this call for QEP Pre-proposals to the University academic community via e-mail. From this, thirty-eight pre-proposals were submitted for review from the library, student affairs, academic affairs, and from each of the academic units. The QEP Steering Committee reviewed and deliberated the QEP pre-proposals in multiple phases over several weeks and developed the best, cohesive set of pre-proposals that they anticipated would generate excitement for promoting active learning across the campus, and with the hope that those pre-proposals selected would serve as models for other departments and programs across campus on how to incorporate active learning into the curriculum. The insights from the QEP pre-proposal submissions were supported by the additional input that the QEP Coordinator received from ongoing conversations in the academic units, and such diverse constituencies as the Faculty Senate, the Undergraduate Assembly, the Graduate Assembly, the alumni board, the student affairs leadership team, and students. The Steering Committee took this input and the insights provided by the pre-proposal submissions and crafted a White Paper on the UT Arlington Active Learning Quality Enhancement Plan. This document was made available for the UT Arlington academic community’s review and comment, so that the input received could further inform the QEP development process. The White Paper contained sections about why active learning is right for UT Arlington, and resulted in a refined working definition of active learning more appropriate for the UT Arlington context: Active learning places the student at the center of the learning process, making him/her a partner in discovery, not a passive receiver of information. It is a process that employs a variety of teaching and learning strategies to place the responsibility for creating and defining the learning environment on the instructor and the responsibility for effective engagement in the learning process on the students. Active learning encourages students to communicate and interact with course materials through reading, writing, discussing, problem-solving, investigating, reflecting, and engaging in the higher order thinking tasks of application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. An active learning approach draws upon a continuum of teaching and learning strategies, including for example class discussion activities, undergraduate research, and community-based learning experiences. Perhaps the most significant change in this refined working definition of active learning is the recognition of the partnership between instructor and student, and the role each plays in a student’s educational experience. Whereas the University’s original working definition of active learning placed “the primary responsibility for creating and/or applying knowledge on the students themselves,” this new definition distinguished between the instructor’s responsibility for creating and defining the learning environment and the student’s responsibility for effectively engaging in the learning process. It was with the above definition in mind that a Social Work class was recruited to begin researching available background information on Active Learning that would be of assistance to our efforts regarding the QEP. Independently of the evaluation of the pre-proposals, the Steering Committee also examined the various surveys discussed in Section II.B, and paid particular attention to deficiencies in the UT Arlington educational experience as reflected in the NSSE survey and the CLA. Furthermore, a gap existed between the importance employers placed on certain higher order thinking skills (defining problems, solving problems, applying conceptual knowledge, and effectively communicating) and the actual performance of these skills by UT Arlington graduates. An additional student/alumni survey that requested feedback on the classroom experience and active learning was also conducted. Analysis of the similarity of responses reinforced the view of the Steering Committee that the QEP should be about promoting active learning as a means to achieve higher order thinking skills. The Committee finalized its selection of the QEP pre-proposals with this outcome in mind. Summer 2006: Additionally, the QEP Coordinator worked with a Social Work Ph.D. student on an independent study to investigate how UT Arlington’s QEP fits with Federal, State, the UT System, and the Coordinating Board’s expectations. Various grants/foundations for possible solicitation of funding were researched and a grant proposal to secure funding to areas of need in faculty training was drafted. The Marketing Committee Task Force was charged to craft a title for the QEP, a logo, promotions, and a marketing/implementation plan for the QEP under the umbrella of the UT Arlington brand (June/July 2006). The QEP Coordinator along with a small team (Drs. Hale, Fox, and Michaels) attended Northeastern’s Summer Institute to craft a strategic plan for training faculty and to sketch out a grant proposal to seek funding to support such (July 2006). Fall 2006: In addition, the Committee established a series of professional development programs that covered such topics as student learning outcomes and mapping to higher order thinking skills, assessment, and rubrics. It also provided for one-on-one interaction with the QEP Coordinator and a faculty facilitator who specializes in assessment rubrics. These development sessions, once refined, will serve as models for developing programs for future faculty who desire to participate in this initiative. One of the most important components of the professional development program for pilot authors was a workshop conducted by Dr. Charles Bonwell, a nationally recognized expert on active learning, on September 13-14, 2006. Dr. Bonwell worked directly with pilot authors to develop active learning course experiences with a view to achieving higher order thinking skills. In addition, Dr. Bonwell held an open workshop for the academic community at large on the topic of active learning with approximately 130 in attendance. The goal in working with the pilot project authors was to create a community of practice (defined as a group of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly [Wenger, 2006]). They, in turn, would be leaders in our efforts to implement active learning as a means to achieving higher order thinking skills and, more broadly, to enhance student learning across campus. TIMELINE: Spring 2006
Summer 2006
Fall 2006
|
