University of Maryland University College: UMUC Digital Repository
Not a member yet
6660 research outputs found
Sort by
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in UMUC's Graduate School - DE Oracle
No full textDE Oracle @ UMUC
An Online Learning Magazine for UMUC Faculty
Center for Support of Instruction
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in
UMUC's Graduate School
Yan Cooksey
Director of Learning Outcomes Assessment
Graduate School of Management and Technology
Published: January-February 2012
Category: » Online-pedagogy » Teaching-strategies
University of Maryland University College (UMUC) has made learning outcomes assessment an
institutional priority. In line with university priority and strategies, UMUC's Graduate School has
established a commitment to ongoing systematic assessment and the use of assessment results to
improve student learning. This article provides an overview of the learning outcomes assessment
framework and processes in the Graduate School.
Importance of Assessing Student Learning
Assessment systematically gathers information about student learning, using the time, knowledge,
expertise, and available resources to inform decisions about teaching and learning improvement
(Walvoord, 2004). UMUC has implemented learning outcomes assessment to help ensure educational
quality and student success. It is a continuous improvement process that reflects the institutional
mission to "offer top-quality educational opportunities to adult students in Maryland, the nation, and
the world, setting the global standard of excellence in adult education" (UMUC, 2011).
Maintaining active outcomes assessment programs is also a mandate of both the Maryland Higher
Education Commission (MHEC) and our accrediting agency, the Middle States Commission on Higher
Education (MSCHE). MSCHE articulates several specific skills as being essential to student learning: oral
and written communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and reasoning,
information literacy, and technological competency. Accordingly, the Graduate School has developed
program assessment plans that are in line with institutional-level and school-level learning outcomes to
assess five student learning expectations (SLEs), including written communication, critical thinking,
technology fluency, information literacy, and content knowledge.
Student Learning Expectations (SLEs)
Outcomes assessment activities are guided by the Graduate School Assessment Framework that was
developed by a group of faculty and program directors in summer 2009. The Graduate School assesses
five SLEs at the program level within required courses for degrees based on the assessment
framework. The SLEs are defined in Table 1 below. Five common rubrics, linked in Table 1, have been
developed by faculty, program directors, and administrators in the Graduate School to grade student
work for outcomes assessment.
Student Learning
Expectations (SLEs)
Definition Assessment
Tool
Written Communication
(COMM)
Demonstrate competence in effective written
communication.
COMM Rubric
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in UMUC's Graduate School - DE Oracle
Information Literacy (INFO) Demonstrate the ability to use libraries and
other information resources to effectively
locate, select, and evaluate needed
information.
INFO Rubric
Technology Fluency (TECH) Demonstrate an understanding of information
technology broadly enough to apply
technology productively to academic studies,
work, and everyday life.
TECH Rubric
Critical Thinking (THIN) Demonstrate the use of analytical skills and
reflective processing of information.
THIN Rubric
Program Content
Knowledge (KNOW)
Demonstrate the ability to apply the
disciplinary knowledge and skills appropriate
for the chosen field of study/program.
KNOW Rubric
Table 1. The Graduate School five student learning expectations (SLEs).
Three-Year Cycle Assessment Process
The outcomes assessment process for the Graduate School runs three rounds in three consecutive
years to assess students who are at the beginning, midpoint, and end of their academic programs (see
Table 2 below). All five SLEs are assessed among randomly selected students each round. Each
assessment round is comprised of various steps that take place in the spring, summer, and fall
semesters of that year.
During the spring semester, faculty members who are identified for conducting assessment select the
student work products (e.g., papers, case studies, and/or research reports) that are appropriate for
assessing different SLEs, grade them using the Graduate School's common rubrics, and then submit
the scoring sheets to the GSMT999 online classroom—a space that was set up for faculty and
administrators to conduct outcomes assessment activities and share resources internally. Collected
student learning information is analyzed by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, and results are
disseminated to faculty, program directors, and administrators in the summer semester. In the fall
semester, each program develops action plans for curriculum and program improvement based on the
assessment results, implements those action plans, and follows up to see if the actions make a
difference in student learning. After completing three of these rounds, assessment liaisons will review
the whole process, make revisions as needed, and start a new assessment cycle.
Round Sampled
Students
Assessed
SLEs
Spring Summer Fall Status
Round 1
(2010)
Within first
9 credits COMM
INFO
TECH
KNOW
THIN
Data
Collection
Data
Analysis
Closing-the-
Loop
Actions
Completed
Round 2
(2011)
Between 9-
18 credits Completed
Round 3
(2012)
After 18
credits In Progress
Table 2. The Graduate School current assessment plan.
Graduate School Assessment Liaisons
The Graduate School has assessment liaisons representing different academic programs. Assessment
liaisons work with program directors to develop and implement their assessment plan and then
disseminate assessment findings and results to appropriate stakeholders (e.g., faculty, department
chairs, dean, etc.). Assessment liaisons meet regularly to discuss issues such as the assessment
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in UMUC's Graduate School - DE Oracle
instrument design and development of assessment plans, help make the assessment process more
effective, and inform decisions of teaching and learning. Table 3 below lists the current assessment
liaisons and the program/unit they support.
Name Program/Unit
Bob Jerome International Management
Datta Khalsa Education
John Aje Dean's Office
Kathryn Klose Financial Management and Accounting
Nancy Glenn Business & Executive Programs
Rana Khan Biotechnology Studies
Rudy Watson Technology Management
Daniel McCollum Office of Evaluation and Assessment
Garth Mackenzie Information Technology Core
Katherine Marconi Health Care Administration
Matt Dobra Financial Management and Accounting
Patricia Spencer Institute for Global Management
Robert Ouellette Environmental Management
Yan Zhang Cooksey Dean's Office
Table 3. The Graduate School assessment liaisons list.
Closing
The goal of outcomes assessment is to systematically gather evidence of student learning and use it
appropriately to improve student learning. Effective assessment is an ongoing process. The Graduate
School will continually apply diligent efforts to the process of planning, implementing, and ultimately
improving student learning to support and ensure student success. If you have any questions,
comments, or concerns about outcomes assessment in the Graduate School, please contact Dr. Yan
Cooksey (mailto:[email protected]) or Dr. John Aje (mailto:[email protected]) in the Dean's Office.
References
University of Maryland University College. (2011). UMUC’s mission and core values. Retrieved from
http://www.umuc.edu/visitors/about/mission.cfm (http://www.umuc.edu/visitors/about/mission.cfm)
Walvoord, B. E. F. (2004). Assessment clear and simple: A practical guide for institutions, departments,
and general education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
About the Author(s)
Yan Zhang Cooksey is the Director for Learning Outcomes Assessment at UMUC's Graduate School. She holds a PhD in Higher
Education Administration from Texas A&M University and an MA in Philosophy and a BA in Political Science from Beijing
Normal University, China.
Rating: Not yet rated
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in UMUC's Graduate School - DE Oracle
Contact Site Manager
Created and Maintained by the Center for Support of Instruction
© University of Maryland University College
Powered by ArticleMS from ArticleTrader.com
Comments
No comments posted.
You must be logged in and be a member of the UMUC community in order to comment.
If you are a member of the UMUC community and do not have an account, please register for a FREE
one.
If you have a guest account but are Faculty/Staff of UMUC please send an email to the DE Oracle Site
Manager (mailto:[email protected]?subject=Please Update my DE Oracle Guest Account) so that your guest account can be
updated.
An Overview of Learning Outcomes Assessment in UMUC's Graduate School - DE Oracl
LRMC synapse program: Helping service members with TBI
No full textThis report defines the causes and symptoms of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). It also describes the Synapse program at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, which has been developed in order to screen and treat TBIs.March 23, 2012 Kaiserslautern American Page 23
by Dr. Kendra Wagers
Landstuhl Regional Medical Center,
rehabilitation psychologist/TBI research
coordinator
Traumatic Brain Injury has been called the signa-ture
injury of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and
after 10 years at war, many of our service members
have been repeatedly exposed to events that have
the potential of causing a brain injury.
More than 1 million military personnel have
deployed since 2001 in support of Operation
Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan or Operations
Iraqi Freedom and New Dawn in Iraq. Current
deployment operations have involved service mem-bers
in ground combat and hazardous security duty.
TBI is the most prevalent injury among warfight-ers
during OND, OIF and OEF as a result of contact
with enemy forces or weapon systems - mortars,
improvised explosive devices, rocket-propelled gre-nades
- and from head impacts from accidents,
enemy action or other factors.
Deployment, therefore, could include being
exposed to gun shots, blast exposures and other
significant potential TBI generating events. Given
the significant length of the war and repeated
deployments of service members to dangerous duty
assignments downrange, there is an increased risk of
exposure to possible TBI events as well as increased
risk of increased symptoms arising from repeat
exposures. Landstuhl Regional Medical Center has
developed an intensive rehabilitation program to
help, called Synapse, which focuses on providing
care to service members who experience TBI.
This interdisciplinary team approach was devel-oped
as a response to the dynamic nature of poten-tial
TBI events service members could experience.
Service members at war are particularly at risk of
TBI, resulting from combat blast injury, which is
usually characterized as resulting from primary
(e.g., exposure to over pressurization wave from
blast), secondary (e.g., impact from blast, debris),
tertiary (e.g., impact after displacement), or qua-ternary
(e.g., burns, inhalation of toxins, hypoxia,
psychological effects) blast effects.
Such blasts effects can produce profound trau-matic
injuries in the brain, including damage to the
parts of the brain that make vision possible, affect
auditory processing, impact balance and coordina-tion,
impair cognitive functioning, and/or impede
occupational performance. Our team of clinicians
works to collaborate and individualize care for our
service members, to educate them on the recovery
from injury, and foster greater understanding of
what they can do to protect themselves.
LRMC’s Synapse program has a strong clinical
team consisting of three TBI neurology providers, a
clinical psychologist, a TBI optometrist, an audiolo-gist,
two physical therapists, two speech therapists,
an occupational therapist, a rehabilitation psycholo-gist
and several nurse case managers. The entire
team evaluates service members experiencing TBI
and determines if intensive services would support
the service member in their return to full duty.
Providers often collaborate on care evaluating the
patient in an integrated service delivery environ-ment
to maximize therapeutic gain. The intensive
program at Landstuhl is individually developed to
meet a service’s unique symptom presentation and
can be a few weeks or up to eight weeks long as
appropriate.
The team also works closely with command to
review job function and performance and tailor
treatment toward addressing specific job capacities
each service member may need to function within
their military occupational specialty. Follow-up ser-vices
and treatment plans are developed at discharge
and can often be implemented via telemedicine,
home therapy programs or with local providers at
the patient’s home base of record.
A vital component to our discharge and follow-up
plan is educating service members and their support
system on engaging in their own recovery and con-sidering
all the factors in their lives that influence a
positive course of rehabilitation.
A positive course of recovery from brain injury
begins and ends with education. Education and out-reach
to command is not only an integral part of the
intensive program, it frames our service delivery.
Every component of our intensive program empha-sizes
the importance of a holistic and dynamic
recovery process. As one TBI specialist has written,
re-framing how we think about an issue to create
a positive outlook can be a vital part of recovery.
Developing awareness, understanding and educa-tion
on the expected course of recovery from brain
injury creates empowerment. Empowerment is how
we build function, create a sense of normalcy and
develop self efficacy. Efficacy powers us toward
our goals.
The goal of the intensive Synapse program is to
offer a comprehensive intensive TBI program that
complements the TBI care throughout the European
theater. We also work closely with TBI providers
throughout the European theater to coordinate care,
disseminate educational resources and foster recov-ery.
Our mission is to not ameliorate symptoms but
foster understanding and recovery.
If you would like to learn more about the pro-gram,
call the LRMC TBI Rehab Clinic at 590-5601
or 06371-9464-5601.
LRMC Synapse Program: Helping service members with TB
Benefits and implications of globalization and post modernization on the operations of multinational corporations in the United States and abroad
No full textThe question this thesis will address is to ‘what extent is this trend beneficial, risky, or not, and what are some of the detriments?’ Analysis will reveal that this trend result in externalities, as group actions in turn affect other.Giles Oji
Social Science
[email protected]
Topic: Benefits and Implications of Globalization and Post Modernization on the Operations of Multinational Corporations in United States and Abroad.
Introduction
History has revealed a growing trend in our social institutional disposition, from the earlier kingdoms of the middle age, the nation-state of the mid 16th century to the current global environment of the 20-21st century. This progressive transformation reveals the latter system as being responsible for exacerbating interactions, scientific development, and so on. It has also become responsible for the modernity that drives industrialization, technology, and resulting in far flung interconnectedness. These interactions include economic, political and socio cultural collusions. Charon (2010) indicated that, “World interaction-the interconnectedness, interdependence, integration, social network, exchanges- accelerated at the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first century” (p. 289).
These characteristics seem to be having a growing commonality in global product and service demands. The information system; media, telecom, internet technologies continue to introduce MNCs’ products and services globally. Charon posited that social interactions among people throughout the world have increased with the technology of air, ground transportation, and network communication (pg. 289). The basic gains of the growing world interactions are the intensified trades, outsourcing, and capital transfer, expansion of markets, corporate relocations, migration, and cultural cohesions.
The question this thesis will address is to ‘what extent is this trend beneficial, risky, or not, and what are some of the detriments?’ My analysis will reveal that this trend result in externalities, as group actions in turn affect other. As Charon insinuated, this system show tensions that exists due to social interactions among individuals, organizations, societies, and nations. He suggested that these tensions create social patterns that compete with societal and national patterns created and established hundreds of years ago (pg. 289). Although these changes have evolved into new social patterns, over the years post modernity has introduced newer systems such as human right cultures that continue to challenge the traditional and modern eras, now with growing conflict within societal and national institutions.
Globalization Trend
Globalization seems to be creating a global social structure, culture and institutions; this can be described as a “World Society” (Charon, 2010, p. 289). The United States corporations first started experiencing and getting involved in international economy in the 1960s. Their involvements included recognizing newer markets, production in some of those markets, exporting from those markets to the home and other oversea markets. Charon suggested that at first the unions did not understand the implication of this free trade to the domestic market (pg. 297). Among all the nations at the core involved in this trend, the US corporations became the largest MNCs globally, benefitting in the sales of goods and services with occasional issues. Opponents of globalization have based their discontent on the loss of jobs to the Global South and East states, as well as in the lean operations processes that have resulted in dehumanizing system in our social institutions. The basis of the foregoing is believed to stem from rationalizations by organization to create control, efficiency, effectiveness, predictability, and synchronized operations, a system which tends to be quite irrational to other stakeholders, spun from this modern system.
Modernization and Post Modernization Era
Modernization perspective has been recognized as resulting from industrial and urbanized social changes. Charon revealed that these changes that are taking place represent the development of traditional societies which are becoming modern and modern societies becoming more global (pg. 290). These developments in industrialization, information technology, trade, political structures, cultures, and institution have become sources of benefit to the world’s modernized organizations and consumers. This also seems to account for individuals’ lost of personal connection between work, life and community. There is also a drift from the rural areas where there is abundance of resources to the urban areas in search of opportunities in white and blue collar jobs. The latter had received the most attention by industrial and market developments. This is a pattern that is becoming more prevalent and making alienation more common. There are also other hazards linked to the industrial production due to technological improvements.
INFED; (the informal education homepage and encyclopedia of informal education) a not-for-profit site established in 1995 at the YMCA George Williams College, London insinuated that these risks are now global. “Modernization risks possess an inherent tendency towards globalization. A universalization of hazards accompanies industrial production, independent of the place where they are produced: food chains connect practically everyone on earth to everyone else. They dip under borders” (Infed, 2011, pg 6). Charon suggested that since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, people have competed within societies and that with globalization of the postmodern era came a worldwide labor source that has allowed large corporations to shop the world to find the cheapest labor supply (pg. 301). This trend is as vast as the earth’s enormity and the comparative advantages resulting from this is becoming responsible for class stratification.
The increased global connectedness resulting from this system has led to the questioning of modern science. Post Modernization perspective of the later centuries challenged the modern era. Operations have developed even more efficiently and become more rationalized. Charon posited that for many, it is not simply an evolution that goes back hundreds of years, but truly a new world that has changed economically, politically, socially, and culturally (pg. 289). Modern science had introduced dehumanization making challenges more unreasonable and common in occurrence. Postmodernism not only approves of the disorganized or chaotic side of society, but embraces it. The result has also accounted for the human right theme in our current culture.
There is also a sense of omission of individual differences and personal self-expression that are left out of the equation of the modern, rationalized system. Postmodernism recognizes the fact that this brings into focus the issues that opponents of this perspective emphasize on, and the fact that there is a fine line between benefits of rationalized business operations and the detriments of globalization. The foregoing also accounts for the dehumanizing experiences of employees and consumers, including how this system affects the poor and other peripheral parts of our global system.
Benefits and Drawbacks; Environment, Cultural Cohesion and Conflict, Economic Conditions of Different, Segments of the Global Population
There are many literatures on the various immediate benefits of the globalization system to all stakeholders, for one, because of their efficient rational lean production system the MNCs enjoy low cost capabilities, and this low cost benefits are passed on to consumers by way of low cost and multiple variety of products and services. Manufacturers are able to import back to the US products from low wage countries of the Global South and East. Under these circumstances Charon suggested that, globalization is thought to be good for consumers because products cost less (pg. 291). Benefits are also passed down to stakeholders, the organization itself, and states of the world at the core, such as the US and some European states, including others that have embraced the growth of an international environment, and MNCs that exceed the bounds of national politics. The search for low wage labor has left the Global North wondering its position with regards to the rate at which jobs are outsourced to the South. The foregoing underpins the structures or characteristics of MNCs’ operations, as well as some of the global risks they convey.
Ritzer (2011, pg. 143) noted that, most important, rational systems are unreasonable systems that deny humanity; the human reasons of the people who work within them or are served by them. There is so much disparity between the relative performance of the working class in different societies, organizations, and nation-states. Global interdependence is resulting in affluence, peace, democracy and social changes in the world, especially for the Global North states located at the core of the system and for the emerging economics such as Brazil, India, and other Global South states that currently benefit from this trend. The social gaps of both absolute and relative poverty are obvious. This global structure is also indicative of class stratification of both individuals and nations, “a discussion of value, a conflict between holding onto capitalistic values and institutions versus values that seek control over capitalism values, that is, other than profit” (Charon, 2010, pg. 292). US participation in this international system depicts continuous dominance as a core state. Capital and corporate headquarters are located in the US while manufacturing takes place in low wage countries. This result also draws on division of labor internationally, hence increasing international social class.
The unequal advantages experienced by nations at the periphery have not afforded them the opportunities as those that exist in nations such as the US at the core. They have no competitive or comparative advantages, thereby absolutely or relatively “making them socially unequal, with characteristics such as less economic power, large population, underdeveloped, unstable economy, dependent of few commodities, or a single mineral resource” (Charon, 2010, pg. 306). This also mirrors the postmodernist conflict of holding values and institutions versus the values that seek some control through capitalism. This situation results in the disparities that continue to exacerbate debates between proponents and opponents of globalization. The foregoing is responsible for the shift in demographic and labor pattern in the US and abroad. The Global North have been attracting migrants from the south (sometimes with the support of institutional initiatives such as North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), World Trade Organization/General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (WTO/GATT)), to fill jobs created by the MNCs rational systems, while irrationally taking from the old era high paid high skilled jobs. These Institutional initiatives are also principal players, creating amicable business climates, while debates rage on some fronts in the US on the possibility of protectionist policies to circumvent the loss of jobs to the global south. The core state governments really have little or no control over the business environment and are hardly able to regulate, leaving MNCs to operate by their own rules.
Charon suggested that modernity would eventually bring people together, depicting a global social culture (pg. 306). Although globalization promises interdependence and interconnections, cultural differences still exists. There is a tug between the emphases on the growing global culture and resisting national culture, another conflict that has prompted debates. Oppositions and receiving populations of the cultural incursion by core states continue to fuel market demands for growing homogenous products, while showing resistance on other fronts. Even in the mist of these interactions and discontent people are still committed to a world society. Charon suggested that, “efforts have turned to the future and the necessity for changing their ways. Global warming, environmental destruction, disrespect for human right are real issues because people feel a commitment to our world community” (Charon, 2010, pg. 313).
This foregoing exacerbates the conflict that exists between the traditional, modern, postmodern perspectives and their affects on global economy, human right, and democracy. Postmodernity also seems to bring to light the emergence of emphasis on human right and democracy. Charon insinuated that human right transcends and penetrates US culture, limiting the government power, military, business and religion, and encouraging diversity and respect for minorities (pg. 309). This trend continues to supersede the growing modern global economy and traditional religious theme that came before it. This sort of highlights the discontent of Postmodernity for modern science and its accomplishments. The global system exposes the connection and advantages on one hand, and a clear line of disadvantages on the other. This also stresses the relative gains to individuals and states. Charon suggested that the globalized system connects those working at the grassroots level to protect, restore, nurture the environment, and to enhance access for the disadvantaged the basic resources they need to live a dignifying existence (pg. 292). The outcome of this is that each state benefiting from this system specializes in a certain area based on their comparative advantages. The connectedness also means shared risks, increased conflicts, and problems; international civil wars, the speed of the spread of diseases, etc. For example, a disease which originated in the Far East Asia in 2003, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), spread vehemently and ended up in numerous states in such a short time. The fear of contamination by this disease was felt all over the world. The global environment has become so fluid that there are only virtual borders, no firm boundary line between States anymore. This conflict accentuates the benefits and risks that now exist.
Conclusion
The foregoing paper indicates that although globalization increases interaction there is still no world culture and some are critical of the cultural thrust (Charon, pg. 307). The modern global economic culture of postmodernity continues to conflict with critics of the capitalism, economic globalization, and modernization (pg. 308). The US is certainly experiencing a pull between this global trend and humanitarian culture, where the cultural theme emphasizes the protection, nurture of human right, and the environment. This is exemplified in the recent reactions to the outsourcing of jobs from the US while creating over 3600 more jobs in the Global South and East by US and other MNCs. The benefits of globalization are certainly enormous and favorable to corporations, while the risks are clear. Dissatisfied citizens are beginning to contemplate protectionist initiatives. As already noted this is sure to create disputes based on agreements under WTO/GATT, NAFTA and other trade treaties and alliances.
The postmodernity perspective seems to support the human agency and social movements that strive to bring cohesive diversity to the world culture, nevertheless, national cultures continue to compete with globalization. This cultural imbalance limits globalization. In the case of governments that think of controlling this trend, under the watchful eyes of institution and agreements such as the WTO/GATT may lose reputation or face reprimands. Violations such as enacting policies or introduce unfair subsidies that distort this free market system may require partners to mitigate through levying of countervailing duties. Other disciplinary action for any protectionist policies could also be possible. In the meantime, the US grandfather status in the world system continues to guarantee her dominant position in the world economy, and of course, with some increasing requests for major internal policy changes to off shoring and minimal back shoring.
Basically, a University of Alabama article on anthropological theories depicts that, “we must now come to terms with the second revolution, that of the Twentieth Century, of postmodernity, which is the immense process of the destruction of meaning equal to the earlier destruction of appearances. Whoever lives by meaning dies by meaning” (Stewart, Wesley, & Weiss, 2011). They revealed that postmodernity concentrates on the tensions of differences and similarity erupting from process of globalization: the accelerating circulation of people, the increasing dense and frequent cross cultural interactions, and the unavoidable interactions of local and global knowledge. The issues discussed above resound the fact that skepticism and affirmation surrounds postmodern thoughts, insinuation control in place by modernity, and the support movement organized around peace, environment, and feminism (Stewart et al, 2011), all of which have been discussed above and signifies the current globalization trend.
Reference
Charon J.M. (2010). Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective, 7th Edition. Australia:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Infed (2011). The Theory and Experience of Globalization. Retrieved from
http://www.infed.org/biblio/globalization.htm.
Ritzer G., (2011). The McDonaldization of Society, 6th Edition, Los Angeles. Sage
Stewart R., Wesley K., & Weiss S., (2011). Postmodernism and Its Critics: Department of
Anthropology., The University of Alabama. Retrieved from
http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/Faculty/murphy/436/pomo.htm
Engage faculty in outcomes assessment to improve student learning
No full textPresented at the Second Annual Association for the Assessment of Learning in Higher Education (AALHE) Conference,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 3, 2012. Engaging faculty actively in the assessment process is still one of the common challenges for many universities and colleges. For those faculty members who are adjunct and not involved daily in institutional activities, full engagement with assessment processes is even more challenging. The authors of this research (Cooksey & Khalsa) developed an online survey instrument for distribution to 30 UMUC Graduate School adjunct faculty members. These 30 adjunct faculty members teach for the Professional Education Unit of The Graduate School’s Department of Education. The purpose of the survey was to identify assessment factors, processes and perspectives, which have influenced the Unit’s faculty engagement with program assessment. With this effort, the department program directors and administration could better determine the strengths or weaknesses of a two-year effort (2010-2011) to engage adjunct Education faculty in UMUC Graduate School Outcomes Assessment, the use of a TK20 assessment management system, awareness of student performance data and collaboration in alignment and refinement of assignments and rubrics in two programs, the MED and MAT.Engage Faculty in Outcomes Assessment to Improve Student Learning
Presented at the Second Annual Association for the Assessment of Learning in Higher Education (AALHE) Conference,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 3, 2012
Dr. Yan Zhang Cooksey & Dr. Datta Kaur Khalsa
University of Maryland University College
Outline of Today’s Presentation
What does the literature say?
What did we do? Why?
What can you imitate or take back with you? UMUC’s Graduate School
Cyber Security
Management Accounting and Finance
Information Technology System
Education
Business Executive Program
UMUC Graduate School – 3-3-3 Model Session Goals
How to enhance faculty engagement in
assessment
Session Goals
Gain a deeper view of adjunct faculty
motivation
perception
engagement Session Goals
What elements of our survey
can serve your faculty engagement efforts? Literature Review— Importance of Faculty Engagement Literature Review— Importance of Faculty Engagement Literature Review— Importance of Faculty Engagement
66% of the respondents (CAOs) indicated faculty engagement as a key element needed to advance assessment(Kuh & Ikenberrry, 2009).
Literature Review— Challenges of Engaging Faculty
Literature Review— Challenges of Engaging Faculty
…find little connection between the assessment process and their day-to-day teaching in the classroom.
(Banta & Blaich, 2011; Hutchings, 2010) Literature Review— Challenges of Engaging Faculty
Only 6% of 146 profiles of good practice submitted by campus across the U.S. included evidence that student learning had improved (Banta, Jones, & Black, 2009). Literature Review—Best Practices
•Abandon the fallacy of the perfect measure
(Schilling & Schilling, 1998, p.92) Literature Review—Best Practices
Embed assessment directly into regular curriculum
Teaching and Learning Centers
Create campus spaces for constructive assessment conversation and action
Reframe the work of assessment as scholarship of teaching and learning
Involve Students
(Hutchings, 2010) Education Department’s Assessment Plan
Data Analysis:
•Student data
•Faculty training
•Refinement
•Collaboration Small Group Discussion 1 – Best Practices
1.Write one of your “Best Practices” related to assessment
2. Place writing in middle of table.
3. Choose a writing – author adds to description
4. Choose another writing, author adds, etc…
.
5. Best idea shared with larger group. Survey Development Framework
Assessment Advocacy
Assessment Engagement
Assessment Motivation
Assessment Awareness Methods
Data Collection Instrument
A 26-item online survey
Likert-scale items and open-ended response items
Designed in collaboration with researchers and focus group
Participants Recruitment
UMUC IRB Approval
Survey and consent form emailed to all faculty members teaching in the Education Department
Response Rate: 93%
Population: 30 (28 respondents) Share the Survey
Acknowledgement: Rodney Reynolds’ Survey Instrument Small Group Discussion 2- Rate with Framework
WHAT LEVEL ARE YOU?
Survey Results— Assessment Awareness
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
I have a good orientation to UMUC’s Education Department’s emphasis on assessment.
The courses that I teach use rubrics for student benefit.
The rubrics in my courses are strongly connected to the
assignment objectives.
UMUC’s Graduate School has assessment requirements for our department.
UMUC’s Education Department has made assessment plans to match NCATE accreditation requirements.
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
AgreeSurvey Results— Assessment Motivation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Each semester I am motivated to improve the
connection between my assignments and the
rubrics offered to students.
I believe that engaging in ongoing improvement
of my course(s) assessment and rubric(s) is
important to the course content and full
program.
I would like to know more about assessment in
the program and Graduate School so that
student learning can benefit.
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly AgreeSurvey Results— Assessment Engagement
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Each semester I give my program director feedback on my course’s assignment(s) and rubric(s).
I engage in discussions with other instructors, who are also
teaching my course, for improved student learning.
With a small team, I review my course(s) assignments and
rubrics to determine if improvement could be made.
I provide feedback to students immediately after each
assessment.
I would like to know more about the Education Department’s assessment process.
I would like to know more about developing well-defined
rubrics.
I would like to know more about Tk20 reports and other
uses.
I would like to know more about NCATE requirements and
how my course is assessed for these purposes.
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly AgreeSurvey Results— Assessment Advocacy
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
I have frequently spoken with
colleagues about assessment.
I have conducted my own research
related to learning objectives, rubrics
or assessment.
I have attended at professional
conference(s) that spoke about an
area of assessment.
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly AgreeSurvey Results— Assessment Resources and Support
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
I have received adequate resources and support from
my department to implement the program outcomes
assessment plan.
I have attended faculty development workshops/training on outcomes assessment hosted by the UMUC’s Graduate School.
I have attended training related to assessment (i.e. rubric development, assessment methods) sponsored by the UMUC’s Center for Teaching and Learning.
The work of assessment is considered as scholarship
of teaching and learning in UMUC.
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly AgreeSurvey Results— Best Practices
•Please describe a way that we can help you understand, implement or improve the assessment plans in your course(s).
“Continued in-service and webinars”
“Screencast discussion of the scoring rubric and an exemplar”
“More opportunities to engage in practical applications of scoring tools.” Survey Results— Best Practices
•Describe one example of how assessment discussion effectively improved student learning in your course (s).
“The CTL rubric course helped me with some rubrics I developed.”
“I took a workshop on conferencing which made me change the way I did conferences this semester. They change was overwhelming…” Survey Results— Best Practices
•What support can be given to you so that you can improve student learning in your course(s)? Moving Forward - More consistency
Each Program Director created ‘next steps’ for Summer/Fall
•Refine rubric alignment with assignments
•Share student performance data with faculty who teach same courses with same assignments.
•Faculty discuss and practice consistent use of rubrics
Certain courses will be targeted
•Faculty training on Assessment Goals
•Student training on rubric expectations Small Group Discussion 3-Take-Aways
WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH TODAY’S INFORMATION?
Stay Connected…
•Dr. Yan Zhang Cooksey: [email protected]
Director for Outcomes Assessment
The Graduate School, University of Maryland University College
http://assessment-matters.weebly.com/blogs.html
•Dr. Datta Kaur Khalsa: [email protected]
Director of Assessment & Associate Professor
Education Department
The Graduate School, University of Maryland University College Resources
•Banta,T. & Blaich, C. (2011). Closing the assessment loop. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43:1, 22-27.
•Banta, T., Jones, E., & Black, K. (2009). Designing effective assessment: Principles and profiles of good practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
•Hutchings, P. (2010, April). Opening doors to faculty involvement in assessment. (NILOA Occasional Paper No.4). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved from: http://learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/PatHutchings_000.pdf
•Kuh,G., and Ikenberry, S. (2009, October). More than you think, less than we need: Learning outcomes assessment in American higher education. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved from: http://www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/niloaabridgedreport.pdf
•Reynolds, R., Lafreniere, S., Olson, C., & Gin, D. (2010), Faculty engagement with assessment: Measurement and the Effects of Self-Advocacy, presented at the CAIR Conference.
•Schilling K., & Schilling, K. (1998). Proclaiming and sustaining excellence: Assessment as a faculty role (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 26:3). Washington, DC: George Washington University
Using Google Docs to enhance graduate-level distance education
No full textGoogle Docs was used successfully in a graduate level class to support collaboration, student engagement, and sharing. The synergy generated clearly improved the learning experience of the students. This research describes the results of using Google Docs and suggests best practices on how this Web 2.0 technology could be used.1
Using Google Docs to Enhance Graduate-Level Distance Education
Les Pang
University of Maryland University College
Graduate School of Management and Technology Abstract Google Docs was used successfully in a graduate level class to support collaboration, student engagement, and sharing. The synergy generated clearly improved the learning experience of the students. This research describes the results of using Google Docs and suggests best practices on how this Web 2.0 technology could be used. Introduction
This paper examines utilizing Google Docs to support distance education classroom activities in a graduate level course. It is of value to instructors and administrators who want to enhance course delivery through increased collaboration and sharing capabilities. This topic is important to maximize student engagement, thereby improving learning and increasing student retention.
Google Docs is a form of cloud computing -- a technology which uses remote computing resources such as servers to provide services to user; whereas, traditionally, these services are delivered via local computing resources such as the users’ hard disk. One flavor of cloud computing involves “software as a service” in which the software application and the files generated by the application reside not on the local hard disk but totally online -- in the Internet “cloud.”
Google Docs is a popular “cloud-based” office suite consisting of word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation applications where users can create, edit and store documents completely online. An important feature is that the suite has unique collaboration capabilities where multiple users can edit shared online documents in either synchronously or asynchronously.
Applications
Google Docs was used in a graduate class as the platform for various activities. The course is Information Technology Foundations (ITEC610). This is the course description:
A fundamental study of technology and its applications, as well as the economic and social issues they have raised. Topics include computers, peripherals, databases and networks; operations (of business, government and other enterprises), decision support systems and acquisition of information technology resources; and information security, productivity, equitable access by users, intellectual property rights and global reach. Discussion also covers current and future developments in the field and their implications.
Students were generally working adults with a solid background on computer technology. 2
The activities involving the use of Google Docs included:
Team research projects and presentations with “single document” peer editing
Blogging (Google Blogger)
Student surveys (Mid-semester course feedback)
Voting and consensus team building
Brainstorming
Signup sheets
Findings
Based on survey feedback from the students (using Google Docs), they generally appreciated the advantages of Google Docs but some had issues. The following advantages were noted:
Easy to access and collaborate
Less local computing resources required
Low learning curve for basic functions
Can access files via any Internet-linked machine
Revision history and ability to revert to an earlier version
Compatibility with different operating systems
Provided at no cost
Students noted several disadvantages:
Lacks advanced capabilities such as mail merging, macros and multiple toolbars.
Potential for editing conflicts among different collaborators.
Formatting was sometimes difficult such as reference lists.
Navigation issues because buttons and links were in unexpected locations.
Certain shared applications are more conducive on paper such as a detailed sketch.
Software is unavailable when the site is down or Internet connectivity cannot be achieved.
Limited bandwidth resulted in delays in having editing changes appear.
Concerns over security and privacy – exposure of personal information.
From the academic perspective, there were several concerns:
Possible exposure of intellectual property.
Lack of branding (no mention of the university in the work space)
No control over the cloud application or hardware
Several best practices were identified:
Establish strict ground rules for entry and editing to avoid editing conflicts.
Provide basic training in using the software.
Use workarounds such as saving specially formatted text as an image and pasting it into the document.
Be careful not to post confidential or sensitive information particularly in collaborative mode. Learn and use the security features of Google Docs. 3
Overall, this approach addressed the pedagogical requirements of engagement and collaboration. In addition, graduate level teaching requires higher order thinking such as synthesis, analysis and critical thinking. Google Docs supported these themes exceedingly well and helped promote the notion that the university applying this approach is a cutting edge institution from a technological perspective.
Current Effort and Next Step
Google Docs is being used for course development purposes during the summer 2011 semester. Instructors were invited to participate in the update of the online content for ITEC 610, specifically the weekly lecturettes that supplement the readings. The collaborative nature of the platform supports this approach for gathering knowledge. But, more importantly, because of the nature of information technology, the use of Google Docs was considered the optimum approach for developing and maintaining this often changing content.
Another proposed action is to utilize Google Docs and Google Apps that is found in many mobile devices such as the iPhone and Android phones in order to deliver content such as the lecturettes, assignments, videos and other learning objects. There are apps available that facilitate the use of Google Docs on this media such as iGoogDocs.
Conclusions
As described above, Google Docs was used successfully in online classes. One student commented: “I'm starting to see more and more how powerful Google Docs can be as a collaborative tool between geographically separated users.” Cloud computing may just be a buzzword today, but through this classroom experience, it was shown that it offers a new and better tool for teaching and collaboration.
Reference List
Adams, D. (2008). Gaga for Google in the twenty-first century advanced placement language classroom. The Clearing House, 82(2), 96-100.
Desisto, R., Plummer, D., & Smith, D.M. (2008, April 7). Tutorial for understanding the relationship between cloud computing and SaaS. Retrieved March 1, 2011, from Gartner database.
iGoogDocs website. Retrieved May 1, 2011 from http://sites.google.com/site/igoogdocs/
Knorr, E., & Gruman, G. (2008). What cloud computing really means. InfoWorld. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/04/07/15FE-cloud-computing-reality_1.html
Natis, Y., Gall, N., Cearley, D., Leong, L., Desisto, R., Lheureux, B., Smith, D. M., & Plummer, D. (2008). Cloud, SaaS, hosting and other off-premises computing models. Retrieved March 1, 2009, from Gartner database. 4
UMUC. Course Descriptions – Graduate School of Management and Technology. Retrieved May 1, 2011 from http://www.umuc.edu/programs/grad/courses/iteccat.shtml.
Young, J. (2008). 3 ways that web-based computing will change colleges—and challenge them. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(10), A16
2nd Annual ShareFair 2012: Overview
No full text2nd Annual ShareFair on UMUC Faculty Research and Scholarship
September 20, 2012 Noon-3pm
Largo Auditorium/1st Floor Hallway/Classroom 1380
Schedule:
12:00-12:30pm Lunch starts promptly at noon: Welcome Comments from Actin Provost Marie Cini (Largo Auditorium)
12:30-1:30pm Faculty Research Poster Session
1:30-2:30pm Birds of a Feather Sessions/ Knowledge Cafes Round Table Discussions
2:30-3:00pm Recognition Awards for Research and Scholarship (including Best Posters, etc.)
Poster Session list is available at http://www.umuc.edu/library/libresearch/sharefair.cf
Critical examination of crisis decision-making models: Are they adequate for 21st century global organizational environments?
No full textResearch on organizational crisis suggests that modern organizational contexts do not meet criteria of industrial-age rationality and analytic thinking in which the majority of crisis decision-making models are positioned. 21st century crises are characterized by technological, competitive, and global factors coupled with ambiguity and speed that have increased the range, scale, and impact of crisis. Modern managers require an updated decision framework of crisis decision making to effectively address the unique characteristics of 21st century global operating environments.A Critical Examination of Crisis Decision-Making Models: Are They Adequate for 21st Century Global Organizational Environments?
Valecia Dunbar, Doctoral Candidate
E-mail: [email protected]
Research Web link: www.wix.com/crisisleadership/brooksdunbar
KEY WORDS: Organizational crisis, crisis management, crisis decision making, 21st century organizations, environmental velocity, global management21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
BACKGROUND & CONTEXT
2
•Crisis Decision Making: Crisis decision making is grounded in four key principles of administrative decision making theory: Rational-Analytic (RAM), Satisficing-Bounded (SB), Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM), and Heuristics & Biases Approaches (HBA).
•Organizational Environments: Organizational crisis is associated with environments of change. Characteristics of industrial-era organizational designs (OD) and environmental contexts (EC) include factors different from the 21st century knowledge era. These factors include: (1) leadership orientation, (2) structure, (3) systems, and (4) environmental forces.3
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Significance
•
Research on organizational crisis suggests that modern organizational contexts do not meet criteria of industrial-age rationality and analytic thinking in which the majority of crisis decision-making models are positioned.
•
21st century crises are characterized by technological, competitive, and global factors coupled with ambiguity and speed that have increased the range, scale, and impact of crisis.
•
Modern managers require an updated decision framework of crisis decision making to effectively address the unique characteristics of 21st century global operating environments. Research Question
4
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
How applicable are crisis decision-making models to 21st century global organizational environments?
Sub Questions:
1.
What crisis decision-making models inform management practice? 2. Under what conditions do these models apply? 3. What are the characteristics of 21st century global organizational environments? 4. What is new about 21st century crisis environments?Argument/Research Propositions
5
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Proposition 1: Extant crisis decision-making models inadequately address 21st century crisis environments.
Proposition 2: 21st century crisis environments include characteristics different from 20th century crisis environments that impact crisis planning, management, and mitigation.•
Pearson, C., & Clair, J. (1998). Reframing crisis management. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 59-76. doi: 10.2307/259099
•
Bazerman, M., & Moore, D. (2009). Judgment in managerial decision making (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
•
Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press
•
Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305-17. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00039.x
•
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 543-575. doi: 10.2307/256434
•
Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
•
Roberts, K. (1990). Managing high reliability organizations. California Management Review, 32(4), 101-114. 6
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Key Literature7
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Conceptual Model: Crisis Decision Making in 21st Century Global Organizational Environments (Dunbar, 2012)•
Evidence-Based Research Synthesis (EBRS): This research is guided by protocols EBRS and presents a scholar-practitioner approach through a systematic review of the literature and synthesis of the evidence to present what is known or not known about the research question (Briner, Denyer, & Rousseau, 2009).
•
CIMO-logic: CIMO-logic in systematic reviews follow evidence-based management (EBMgt) protocols that interject the context of the problem under study (Denyer, Tranfield, & van Aken, 2008). CIMO-logic asks that under a certain context (C), which type of intervention (I), used in the underlying mechanisms(M), achieves a particular outcome (O). 8
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
MethodologySYNTHESIS OF CRISIS DECISION-MAKING THEORIES (1963 – 2011)
RAM
SB
NDM
HBA
RAM
SB
NDM
HBA
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Findings/Results
Linear vs. Flexible Approaches to Crisis Decision Making
Non optimum choice, n=3 models
Optimum choice, n=10 models
Choice good enough, n=2 models
Intuitive choice n= 2 modelsFindings/Results
Initial analysis of 17 crisis decision-making models (CDMs) finds the majority of these models are grounded in RAM frameworks. Environmental and situational factors of modern organizations suggest that (CDMs) are adequate when viewed holistically as one integrated model that is adaptive and flexible to respond to the needs of the environment.
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
NOT A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH: Integrating 21st century organizational contexts into crisis management and crisis decision making.
RAM
SB
NDM
HBA
RAM
SB
NDM
HBA
0CONTEXT MATTERS: FACTORS OF GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONAL CRISIS DECISION-MAKING
RAM
SB
NDM
HBA
.
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Table 9. New 21st Century Crisis Environments
Leader Orientation (Cultural/Change)
Degree of Risk Tolerance
(Structural)
Degree of Coupling
(Complexity of Organization System)
Environmental Velocity (Interdependency)
Leadership Culture and Orientation to Change:
-Situational
-Motivation
-Ethical Boundaries
-Reputation
-Sensemaking
-Resilience
-Mindfulness
High Reliability Organization:
Nuclear Power Plant,
Military Organization, Air Traffic Operation, Emergency Department, Power Grid Dispatching, Continuous Processing Firms, Firefighter Crews
Non High Reliability Organization:
Educational Institution, Manufacturing Firm
Tight (Little Slack):
Operations-Invariant Sequences ,
Processes-Time Dependent,
One Way Goal,
HROs
Loose Slack:
Systems Independent (causal, negligible causal effects
Counter Effects of Positive and Negative Forces:
-Demand
-Competitors
-Technology
-Regulation
-Products
Source: Perrow, 1984; Weick, 1988; Eisenhardt, 1989; Roberts, 1990 •
Positions crisis DM within the organizational context and its global management position.
•
Provides a model that considers organizational design and management culture to address contexts of crisis.
•
Addresses managerial orientation to crisis by role, proximity, and situational factors.
FUTURE CASE STUDIES
•
2005 FEMA Hurricane Katrina Disaster; 2007 Virginia Tech Shooting; 2008 Global Financial Crisis; 2009 Toyota Recall Crisis; 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Disaster; 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Disaster
12
21st CENTURY CRISIS DECISION MAKING
Implications for Managemen
Pre and post test on intercultural competency in undergraduate students at UMUC
No full textThis study surveyed approximately 120 undergraduate students at UMUC in order to determine levels of intercultural competency before and after an organizational culture class. The students were measured based on an instrument developed by the INCA questionnaire. INCA (Intercultural Competence Assessment) is a three-year Leonardo da Vinci II project which developed a framework, diagnostic tool, (partly computerized) and record of achievement for the assessment of intercultural competence. Additionally, one group of students "journaled" during their coursework and another group did not. Both groups were also compared in order to verify any possible difference.Fall 2012 Faculty Research Grant summary report
To: Jay Liebovitz
CC: Stephen Miller
From: David Szabla and Liliana Meneses
Pre and Post Test on Intercultural competency in Undergraduate students at UMUC
This study surveyed approximately 120 undergraduate students at UMUC in order to determine levels of intercultural competency before and after an organizational culture class. The students were measured based on an instrument developed by the INCA questionnaire. INCA (Intercultural Competence Assessment) is a three-year Leonardo da Vinci II project which developed a framework, diagnostic tool, (partly computerized) and record of achievement for the assessment of intercultural competence. Additionally, one group of students "journaled" during their coursework and another group did not. Both groups were also compared in order to verify any possible difference.
Students were given a survey consisting of 18 questions. These questions measured intercultural competency along six dimensions: tolerance of ambiguity, behavioral flexibility, communicative awareness, knowledge discovery, respect for otherness and empathy.
The preliminary findings of this study are threefold. Number 2 and 3 build upon the finds in number 1:
1) Levels of intercultural competency among UMUC students
Going into this study, we did expect a high level of global knowledge to already be present among our students. As an example, in a recent Organizational Culture course taught by one of the researchers at UMUC, a class of 30 students was surveyed and we found that we had students had either been born, lived, or worked in Germany, Austria, Japan, Afghanistan, South Korea, Ireland, Mexico, Guatemala and Poland. However, the results from the measure used in this survey showed the IC level of the students in this class to be extremely high, rating an average of 2.5 on a scale of 1-3.
At this point it is unknown whether this characteristic applies across the board. One of the questions that arises is: are the students who enroll in this class (which is an elective) naturally drawn to this course because of their global experience and knowledge?
The researchers plan to extend this survey to students in other disciplines and programs, in order to determine if the same results would appear with a similar group of students who do not choose the organizational culture class as an elective.
2) Dimensions
The lowest scores among UMUC students were Tolerance for Ambiguity and Behavioral Flexibility. The highest score was Empathy, followed by Communicative Awareness and Respect for Otherness.
3) Comparing Pre and Posttest Scores
The results of the t test indicated that there was no significant difference between the pre and posttest scores of intercultural competence among the students. The intercultural competence scores of students at the start of the class were similar to the intercultural competence scores of the same students at the end of the class. This is probably due to the fact that these scores were so high at the beginning that there was little to no room for a statistically significant difference in IC measures.
4) Comparing "Journaling" with "No Journaling" Groups
The results of the t test indicated that there was no significant difference between the pre and posttest scores of intercultural competence among the group without the reflection exercises. The intercultural competence scores of students at the start of the class were similar to the intercultural competence scores of the same students at the end of the class. This leads to two possible conclusions:
1 - Journaling makes no significant difference when learning intercultural competence
2 - The student body is so high on intercultural competence coming into the course that it is impossible to detect any significant difference on the IC scale.
Follow up:
1 - Currently the results of this study are being written up and will be presented at the 13th International Conference on Culture, Knowledge and Change in June of 2013. A manuscript will also be submitted for publication in the organization's journal.
2 - We are continuing to incorporate the INCA survey in this class and will continue to collect longitudinal data on IC in order to compare with different programs, and possibly different institutions