“Developing Curriculum for a Multi-Course Interdepartmental Learning Community to Promote Retention and Learning for Underprepared Engineering Students”
by Rachel A. Milloy, Matthew Moberly, and Rebecca Powell | Xchanges 9.1
Formative and Summative Assessment: Gathering Stories and Numbers
After revising the ILC English 111 curriculum, we chose formative and summative assessment measures to gauge the effects of our efforts and how students experienced those efforts. Formative assessment tools make space in the classroom for reflection, continually asking the question, “What have students learned and how well have they learned it?” (Gabriel 8). Kathleen F. Gabriel’s Teaching Unprepared Students: Strategies for Promoting Success and Retention in Higher Education claims underprepared students benefit from formative assessment techniques because they develop a metacognitive awareness of their own learning.
Because the ILC aims to influence student attitudes, learning, and work habits, we adopted the following formative assessment tools: classroom assessment techniques (CATS), learning logs, cover letters, and student conferences. In addition to these formative measures, summative assessment measures gave us the big picture in both numbers and stories. Focus groups, student work reviews, a qualitative survey, and institutional tracking allow us to see how the experience of the ILC impacts students’ attitudes, learning, and work habits.
Classroom Assessment Techniques: In a seminal work on student attrition, Tinto writes “A productive learning environment involves establishing and communicating student expectations and providing meaningful feedback to students” (85). Formative assessments like CATS let instructors gauge student learning on a daily basis and open opportunities for communication. Popularized by Angelo and Cross, classroom assessment techniques can assess student learning, allowing us to deliver just-in-time instruction and facilitate review and discussion.
Learning Logs: Created by Chris Burnham, Learning Logs ask students to practice metacognition and allow instructors to gauge how assignments, course materials and class discussion are being interpreted and used by students. Four times throughout the semester, students are asked to reflect on how their work meets the learning objectives for the course.
Cover Memos: For major assignments, we asked students to complete cover memos. Students address the following topics: time spent on the assignment, strongest and weakest portions of the paper, changes they would make in the draft or their writing process, and specific sections or issues they would like the instructor to address.
Student Conferences: Throughout the course of the semester, students were also asked to meet individually two to three times with English instructors. These individual conferences foster another avenue for communication, allowing instructors to model academic behaviors and foster student-instructor relationships.
Student Survey: At the end of the semester, each student in the ILC completes a qualitative survey. In the survey, students develop a metaphor about their experience in the ILC, write a paragraph about attitudes and habits they developed during the ILC, and describe the activities and concepts they found most valuable.
Focus Groups: At the end of the curriculum revision, we knew why we were doing what we were doing, but we wanted to know how students experienced the course re-design. Focus groups gave us that knowledge, revealing issues the students themselves see as problematic, as well as ILC activities that they find most helpful.
Institutional Tracking: The program tracks the retention rate, GPA and graduation rate of participating ILC students. These numbers demonstrate the long-term effects of the program and speak persuasively to the learning community model.