MJC, SLOs and WASC
Our accrediting agency has told us we must
use SLOs to improve learning.
In
October 2005, as a requirement for maintaining our accredited
status, a WASC site visitation team visited Modesto Junior College
after reviewing our self-study, a document we diligently
prepare that is our self-assessment of our own institutional
effectiveness. In January of 2006, the team made a series of
recommendations in areas of weakness that MJC must respond to by
October, 2007, in order to maintain our accredited status.
__________________________________________________
Student Learning Outcomes*-Related
Recommendations
made by the WASC
Accreditation Site Visitation Team
January, 2006
The team found
that the college meets most of the requirements of Standard II.
However, the college has not yet developed student learning
outcomes or plans for assessing them at the degree, certificate,
program, or course level. The college has engaged in widespread
discussion and training but needs to move ahead to actually put SLOs
in place.
The team
recommends that the college develop, implement, and assess student
learning outcomes to ensure student success in courses, programs,
certificates, degrees, and services and use the assessment and
analysis for the purpose of improvement.
(IB.1,5,6,7;IIA.1,2,3,7;IIB,.4 and Eligibility Requirements 8 and
10)
Recommendation 2
Develop a
comprehensive approach to outcomes assessment that includes
classroom, units, and institutional levels. (New Standards IIA; IIA.
1a,c; IIA.2b,f; IIB.4; IIC)
The college has
a Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) Committee and, since writing the
self study, has filled a 40 percent SLO facilitator position.
Considerable dialogue has occurred about SLOs, and the college
continues to struggle with concerns about some implications of SLO
development. Since completion of the self study, the Academic Senate
and administration have signed a memo of understanding to alleviate
certain faculty communities’ faculty are conducting research and
developing pilot SLO activities for spring 2006. Some areas of the
college are using institutional data to assist in planning and
development, but this is an inconsistent practice institution-wide.
The team
concluded that the college has partially addressed this
recommendation.
10. Student
Learning and Achievement
The team
verified that Modesto Junior College is currently engaging in campus
wide dialogue to understand student learning objectives, assessment,
and evaluation of learning and using outcomes to improve learning
and inform decision making. At present, no plan is in place for
developing learning outcomes for course and programs.
IIA:
Instructional programs
General
Observations
Faculty
concern about SLO that has impeded progress in SLO development
is waning, but it is by no means completely gone. The new
Memo of Understanding about SLO and new faculty interest in the
topic bodes well for progress in the future. Budgetary concerns have
impacted staffing in the research office, and the college has
changed its data systems. This has impeded the use of data in
assessment and planning. Information is now available through the
intranet that allows access to Datatel reports. How extensively this
information is applied to planning or SLO development is not clear.
Findings and
Evidence
Research and
analysis is not used systematically across the college to identify
student needs and assess progress. The college is engaged in
discussion about student learning outcomes, but currently no course,
program, or institutional SLOs are in place.
Some pilot
activities are planned for spring 2006 in English, psychology,
science, library, learning labs, and learning communities. The
English pilot will use a grading rubric for two courses.
The Centers for
Learning Assistance (CLA) have been analyzing student success data
in the learning labs. Workshops and institutes have focused on the
development of SLOs, and about 70 full-and part-time faculties have
participated, representing approximately 75 percent of the college’s
disciplines. Modesto Junior College has published workshop
activities and resource materials from the Student Learning Outcomes
Institute in the comprehensive document, “Student Learning Outcomes-
A Focus on Result.” The publication provides support for writing
SLOs at the lesson, course, and program levels. The 13 appendices
include exemplary examples and resources for developing and
implementing SLOs.
A research and
planning director has been rehired as well as a 40 percent SLO
facilitator. Institutional data is not being consistently accessed
or utilized. This particularly true in the assessment of student
success. The CC, program review process, and EMP support the
development and improvement of quality courses programs, but links
are weak between program review and EMP. Data is not used well by
all units for programs review. Program review does not produce
measurable outcomes. There are many participatory committees with
various plans; however, no connections are set and funding decisions
are made (including those concerning faculty’s
construction/renovation projects). (IIA; IIA.1a,b.c; IIA.2b,g)
Faculty
members are aware of the criteria for general education courses and
currently address course objectives for student learning, but no
formal methodology is in place linking course outlines to SLOs.
Because SLOs
are yet to be developed, course outlines address course objectives
but not SLOs. The CC is considered changes to its course outline
form and other materials to facilitate the connection between course
objectives and the development of SLOs. (IIA.6)
*The MJC Student Learning Outcomes
Committee has determined that the term objective (as opposed
to "outcome") most appropriately addresses the assessment
needs as objectives incorporate elements that identify the
conditions, learning, and benchmarks of satisfactory performance to
indicate that learning is/has taken place.