{"id":35,"date":"2011-06-06T15:45:39","date_gmt":"2011-06-06T15:45:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/?page_id=35"},"modified":"2012-05-10T12:49:39","modified_gmt":"2012-05-10T17:49:39","slug":"module-5","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/?page_id=35","title":{"rendered":"5. Data-informed Curriculum Improvement"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3>Module 5 -\u00c2\u00a0Data-Informed Curriculum Improvement: Setting Priorities and Planning for Change<\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>There is little in the literature about the process of decision-making for engagement in continuous curriculum improvement. One thing however is clear:\u00c2\u00a0In making decisions regarding curricular improvement, schools of engineering, departments and faculty members need to agree on an educational point of view or purpose upon which to base improvement. A purpose serves to create a framework and some parameters within which to begin the process of ongoing curriculum improvement. Doll (1996) argued that when curriculum planners fail to plan around a specific purpose, they soon begin to improvise and, he argues, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153improvisation leads to capriciousness and self interests\u00e2\u20ac\u009d (p. 205).<\/p>\n<p>While curriculum mapping and other forms of data collection can certainly help to identify the greatest learning needs and successes of students, those data points are also useful tools for identifying opportunities for faculty development. Careful analysis of maps and other data may help identify the need for faculty members to learn new instructional or assessment strategies to better support students\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 learning. Identifying those opportunities is a critical component of continuous curriculum improvement.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>In this module, a series of fictitious, though realistic scenarios are outlined. Findings from a variety of data sources are presented for each scenario and indications, judgments and recommendations that might result are discussed. The approach to curriculum change adopted in each scenario outlines the ways in which a series of relatively minor changes adopted by many can result in dramatic improvements to programming, curricular alignment and overall student learning achievement and satisfaction.<\/p>\n<p>The information and activities in this module have been selected to help you:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">\n<li>Rely on data to inform decision-making<\/li>\n<li>Identify realistic yet significant priorities for program improvements<\/li>\n<li>Devise an action plan for improvement<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>View the Live Workshop on Curriculum Improvement:<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<div class=\"x-video player\" data-x-element-mejs><div class=\"x-video-inner\"><video class=\"x-mejs x-wp-video-shortcode advanced-controls\" id=\"video-35-1\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" poster=\"http:\/\/.\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/curriculum_improvement.jpg\" controls=\"controls\"><source type=\"video\/mp4\" src=\"http:\/\/.\/wp-content\/Videos\/EGAD_6.mp4?_=1\" \/><source type=\"\" src=\"http:\/\/video-js.zencoder.com\/oceans-clip.webmm?_=1\" \/><\/video><\/div><\/div>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p><!--nextpage--><\/p>\n<h4>Case 1: Addressing Noted Gaps in Graduate Attribute Coverage<\/h4>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<h5>Findings:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Curriculum maps of Program X indicted that development of all\u00c2\u00a0Engineering Graduate Attributes was supported in first year programming.\u00c2\u00a0Course ENG100, ENG102 supported all 12 attributes. While none of the remaining 10 first-year courses dealt with all 12 attributes, in aggregate,\u00c2\u00a0they included introductions to, instruction in and assessment of all\u00c2\u00a0attributes. Student surveys and focus groups supported curriculum\u00c2\u00a0mapping data.<\/p>\n<p>The results of curriculum mapping, confirmed by student surveys and\u00c2\u00a0focus group interviews, also indicated that there were no reports of\u00c2\u00a0opportunities to develop or demonstrate attributes 3.1.9 (Impact of Engineering on\u00c2\u00a0Society and the Environment) or 3.1.10 (Ethics and Equity) again until\u00c2\u00a0late in 4th year.<\/p>\n<h5>Judgment:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>In light of the department\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s newly articulated aim to graduate engineers\u00c2\u00a0with a heightened sense of environmental responsibility and social justice,\u00c2\u00a0faculty members and the curriculum committee deemed current programming congruent with stated aims.<\/p>\n<h5>Recommendations &amp; Further Action:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Increase opportunities for students to continue to develop skills and\u00c2\u00a0knowledge related to attributes 3.1.9 (Impact of Engineering on Society\u00c2\u00a0and the Environment) and 3.1.10 (Ethics and Equity) through 2nd and 3rd\u00c2\u00a0years.<\/p>\n<p>Building on suggestions generated by students in focus group interviews,\u00c2\u00a0faculty members identified opportunities within the current\u00c2\u00a0curriculum that might be used to better advantage. Instructors who used case studies updated them to include components related to both under-represented attributes. Associated rubrics were similarly updated. It was anticipated that minor adjustments such as these would result in significant improvements to programming and to student satisfaction with their learning experience.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong><em>What criteria might you choose to judge the relative success of the changes made?<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><strong><em><img decoding=\"async\" title=\"Next page...\" src=\"http:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/wp-includes\/js\/tinymce\/plugins\/wordpress\/img\/trans.gif\" alt=\"\" \/><br \/>\n<\/em><\/strong><!--nextpage--><\/p>\n<h4>Case 2: Identified Instructional Gaps<\/h4>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<h5>Findings:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Focus group interview results indicate that students report being under-prepared for ENG300. Curriculum mapping survey results suggest that\u00c2\u00a0ENG200, the pre-requisite course, should adequately prepare students for\u00c2\u00a0success in ENG300.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretations:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>There is incongruence between the intended curriculum and student&#8217;s preparedness. Specifically, readiness for ENG300 and preparation in ENG200 are not aligned.<\/p>\n<h5>Recommendations &amp; Further Action:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p><em>What might be a reasonable next step for a department\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s curriculum committee to undertake in this situation?<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Curriculum committee chairs may choose to invite both profs to share curriculum maps and clarify their intentions for student learning to ensure congruence.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><em>What procedures might a department implement in the future to minimize the occurrence of these gaps?<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Making curriculum mapping a collaborative endeavour.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong><em>What criteria might you choose to judge the relative success of the changes made?<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><em><br \/>\n<\/em><\/p>\n<p><!--nextpage--><\/p>\n<h4>Case 3: Misaligned Assessment<\/h4>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<h5>Findings:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Curriculum mapping surveys indicate that assessment opportunities exist\u00c2\u00a0for all Engineering Graduate Attributes yet the results of student surveys\u00c2\u00a0indicate that students are frustrated by their inability to adequately\u00c2\u00a0demonstrate attributes 3.1.5 (Use of Engineering Tools, 3.1.7\u00c2\u00a0(Communication Skills) and 3.1.8 (Professionalism)<\/p>\n<p>In revisiting the findings, it was discovered that while attributes 3.1.5, 3.1.7, and 3.1.8 are assessed it is noted that the\u00c2\u00a0assessment tools most often used are written tests, exams and group work.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretations:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p><em>What interpretations might you make based on the findings?<\/em><\/p>\n<p>(Type of assessment may be incongruent with the intended learning. That is, attainment of a graduate attribute might be being inferred rather than directly observed)<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5>Recommendations &amp; Further Action:<\/h5>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p><em>What possible actions might be undertaken?<\/em><\/p>\n<p>(Invite students\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 comments; consider devising opportunities for authentic assessment; consider devising group assessment that includes heightened individual accountability<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><em> <\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong><em>What criteria might you choose to judge the relative success of the changes made?<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><!--nextpage--><\/p>\n<h3>Module 5 Summary<\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\".\/wp-content\/themes\/platformpro\/images\/line_separator.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"605\" height=\"2\" \/><\/p>\n<p>The following might be included as a list of considerations when undertaking steps for curriculum change.<\/p>\n<h4><strong><span style=\"font-size: 15px; line-height: 18px;\">Principles of Decision-making and Process<\/span><\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>Decisions for curriculum change should be reached collaboratively among the faculty and be made:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>for valid educational reasons<\/li>\n<li>on the basis of the best available evidence<\/li>\n<li>in a context of a broadly conceived purpose<\/li>\n<li>by balancing the needs of the learners, the learning process and the nature of the subject matter<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>adapted from:<\/p>\n<p>Doll, R.C. (1996). Curriculum improvement: Decision making and process (9<sup>th<\/sup> ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &amp; Bacon.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Module 5 -\u00c2\u00a0Data-Informed Curriculum Improvement: Setting Priorities and Planning for Change There is little in the literature about the process of decision-making for engagement in continuous curriculum improvement. One thing however is clear:\u00c2\u00a0In making decisions regarding curricular improvement, schools of engineering, departments and faculty members need to agree on an educational point of view or purpose upon which to base &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":0,"parent":857,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-35","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","no-post-thumbnail"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/35","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=35"}],"version-history":[{"count":59,"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/35\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":132,"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/35\/revisions\/132"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/857"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/egad.engineering.queensu.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=35"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}