In 2008, the OECD launched the AHELO feasibility study, an initiative with the objective to assess whether it is possible to develop international measures of learning outcomes in higher education.
Learning outcomes are indeed key to a meaningful education, and focusing on learning outcomes is essential to inform diagnosis and improve teaching processes and student learning. While there is a long tradition of learning outcomes’ assessment within institutions’ courses and programmes, emphasis on learning outcomes has become more important in
recent years. Interest in developing comparative measures of learning outcomes has increased in response to a range of higher education trends, challenges and paradigm shifts.
The postsecondary undergraduate educational experience takes place in an environment rife with expectation. Those “bright college years,†destined to be memorialized and celebrated, attract a cluster of sociocultural images and resonances, some realistic and some fanciful. Students see these years as a unique time of opportunity and unprecedented autonomy, a psycho-social moratorium where possibilities open up and they can grow into their own adult skins. And while matriculating students look forward to what awaits them, the other group intensely involved in the educational process — the faculty — looks back, projecting their own experience-derived expectations upon undergraduates who, in fact, may be
experiencing a generationally-different world. What should new students expect to find when they begin — and settle into — this new, but temporary, university life? And how will those expectations change as they are met, surpassed, or frustrated? What should faculty expect of students, and will they or should they measure up to faculty models? To what extent can faculty expectations serve as a control or calibrating influence on the subjective expectations and experiences of students?
These are questions that are of vital interest to those attempting to understand the link between student engagement and student success and, in this paper, these questions are explored through three surveys—the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), the Beginning College Survey of Student Engagement (BCSSE), and the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE).
itted to excellence in teaching, applied learning, and innovation.
By understanding the path from education to employment, we will:
• Set the benchmark to which all colleges will aspire and be recognized as a key resource in shaping the future of Toronto as a leading global city.
• Build a seamless bridge between learners and employment as we develop dynamic programs and workplace-ready graduates who will be the candidates of choice for employers.
• Create a community of lifelong learners, grounded in the principles of access, diversity, mutual respect, and accountability.
Equity and Access to Higher Education?
Participation rates in both university and college vary based on the student’s
family income. That variation is relatively small for college students, but
skews toward children from wealthy families for universities. College students
come almost evenly from the family income quartiles; regardless of
family income, about 25% of students come from each family income quartile.
In contrast, more university students come from wealthy families than
low-income ones. Almost 35% of all university students come from the top
quartile, compared to just under 20% from the poorest quartile.
Post-Secondary Education in Ontario: Managing Challenges in an Age of Austerity January 2013
The Student Success Program (SSP) at George Brown College is designed to foster a supportive college environment for first-year students. The College committed to fund the SSP for a five-year period beginning in 2008-2009. As part of the SSP, a range of academic and non-academic activities are offered to first-year students in order to promote collaborative learning and peer interaction. Some of these activities take place in class, while others are offered outside of class. The SSP components are tailored to programs within individual centres or schools, so as to provide the types of activities best suited to assist first-year students in those areas.
This research was conducted to gain in-depth knowledge about mature1 students’ persistence2 in a university-college environment, with the ultimate aim of informing institutional student retention policies and practices. The specific purpose of this exploratory study was to broaden and deepen our understanding of the multifaceted nature of mature students’ lives and those factors exerting important influences on mature students’ educational commitment and persistence. Of particular interest were those quality of life dimensions and relevant contextual factors that are associated with mature students’ decisions to persist or withdraw in their first year of post-secondary education. This research is important, as there are few studies that take into consideration adult learners’ unique life circumstances and educational challenges, and fewer still that explore adult quality of life influences on student retention.
Abstract
This report presents the results of a study examining the experiences of students with disabilities who graduated from five Ontario colleges between 2007 and 2010. The five colleges were representative of four geographical areas (central, eastern, western and northern) and of differing sizes, from small to large. The study used administrative data obtained from each college’s disability service office to examine two groups: graduates with disabilities (GwD) and graduates without disabilities (GwoD). These groups were compared in order to determine whether GwD required a longer time to graduate than GwoD. Program and academic factors related to the length of time taken to complete the program, such as the type of disability and the use of accommodations and services, were examined. The results show that when graduates with disabilities are compared to a similar group of students without disabilities, they require slightly but significantly more time to graduate. In addition, regression models show that within the GwD population, the credential type, program area, type of disability and GPA score all influence whether a graduate takes extra time to complete his or her program.
The 2015 report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) provided the country with a roadmap for establishing a new, mutually respectful relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. Despite the history of Canada's residential school system, the report highlighted the important role of education in the reconciliation process and called upon government and educators to reduce longstanding gaps in education and employment outcomes.
Mohawk College promises its students a “college experience that empowers them to transform their lives.” Mohawk recognizes that student success depends on the entire experience students have at college, both inside and outside the classroom.
She has been contributing to the field of counseling and sociology since the early 1950’s.
Bachelors of Arts in Sociology in 1951 from Barnard College in 1951.
Ed.D in Counseling in 1961 from Teachers College, Columbia University.
Served on the faculties of Wayne State University, Howard University and Pratt University and at the University of Maryland, College Park.
Currently she is a professor emeritus in the Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, College of Education, and Director of Counseling of the Center of Human Services Department, University of Maryland, College Park
(Schlossberg et al., 1995).
This morning I will speak to what we must do next to more effectively address the continuing problem of student attrition in higher education. To do so I will briefly look back on what is now a thirty-year history of research & practice on student retention and reflect on the lessons we have learned over that time. I will argue that we have yet to attend to the deeper educational issues that ultimately shape student success in higher education. Until we do so, our efforts will always be less effective than we desire.
The nature of the American academic workforce has fundamentally shifted over the past several decades. Whereas fulltime
tenured and tenure-track faculty were once the norm, the professoriate is now comprised of mostly non-tenure-track
faculty. In 1969, tenured and tenure-track positions made up approximately 78.3 percent of the faculty and non-tenuretrack
positions comprised about 21.7 percent (Schuster & Finkelstein, 2006). Forty years later, in 2009, these proportions
had nearly flipped: tenured and tenure-track faculty had declined to 33.5 percent and 66.5 percent of faculty were ineligible
for tenure (AFT Higher Education Data Center, 2009). Of the non-tenure-track positions, 18.8 percent were full-time and
47.7percent were part-time.
The use of a participant survey, administered at the outset of an online course, can provide information useful in the management of the learning environment and in its subsequent redesign. Such information can clarify participants’ prior experience, expectations, and demographics. But the very act of enquiring about the learner also signals the instructor’s social presence, relational interest, and desire to enter into an authentic dialogue. This study examines the use of participant surveys in online management courses. The first section discusses the informational bridges that this instrument provides. The second section considers survey responses to open-ended questions dealing with student sentiments. This analysis suggests that the survey plays a valuable part in accentuating social presence and in initiating relational bridges with participants.
Keywords: Instructional design; instructional management; social presence; learner engagement; relational dialogue
. Unique value-added in the research “market-placeâ€;
. Experience in applying new knowledge to solve industry problems and achieve industry goals;
. Personnel with expertise and experience across key sectors of the economy;
. The ability to rapidly move innovative ideas through the early stages of development and commercialization;
. State-of-the-art facilities, equipment and space to support the development of new products and applications; and
. A sustained commitment to a culture of innovation.
Systemic barriers that currently limit the degree to which colleges can contribute to the future achievement of Ontario’s productivity and prosperity goals include:
. A permissive but not enabling provincial policy framework for college applied R&D and innovation;
. No operating funding for Ontario colleges supporting applied research activities, resulting in:
. A shortage of funds to strengthen colleges’ institutional capacity to initiate, undertake and manage applied R&D and innovation projects that respond to industry and community needs in a timely way;
. A shortage of funds to support college personnel conducting applied R&D and innovation projects; and
. A shortage of funds to enable college applied R&D personnel to rapidly establish partnerships to address applied R&D challenges and to sustain and foster long-term relationships with key personnel from business, industry and community organizations. To strengthen provincial economic competitiveness and prosperity, Ontario colleges are calling on the government of Ontario to:
. Move beyond merely ermissive policies in relation to applied R&D and innovation activities at Ontario colleges and develop a formal provincial policy and investment framework that recognizes and enables the unique roles colleges can play in support of applied R&D and business and industry innovation activities;
. Explicitly develop Ontario colleges’ applied research, innovation and commercialization
capacity; and
. Enable colleges to increase their capacity for applied R&D and innovation partnerships
with business, industry, federal and provincial governments, and com-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Educational Assessment: Designing a System for More
Meaningful Results
The past few years have ushered in more strident calls for accountability across institutions of higher learning. Various internal and external stakeholders are asking questions like "Are students learning what we want them to learn?" and "How do the students' scores from one institution compare to its peers?" As a result, more institutions are looking for new, more far-reaching ways to assess student learning and then use assessment findings to improve students' educational experiences.
However, as Trudy Banta notes in her article An Accountability Program Primer for Administrators, “just as simply weighing a pig will not make it fatter, spending millions simply to test college students is not likely to help them learn more.” (p. 6)
While assessing institutional effectiveness is a noble pursuit, measuring student learning is not always easy, and like so many things we try to quantify, there’s much more to learning than a number in a datasheet. As Roxanne Cullen and Michael Harris note in their article The Dash to Dashboards, “The difficulty we have in higher education in defining and measuring our outcomes lies in the complexity of our business: the business of learning. A widget company or a fast-food chain has clearly defined goals and can usually pinpoint with fine accuracy where and how to
address loss in sales or glitches in production or service. Higher education is being called on to be able to perform similar feats, but creating a graduate for the 21st century workforce is a very different kind of operation.” (p. 10)
This special report Educational Assessment: Designing a System for More Meaningful Results features articles from Academic Leader, and looks at the assessment issue from a variety of different angles. Articles in the result include:
• The Faculty and Program-Wide Learning Outcome Assessment
• Assessing the Degree of Learner-Centeredness in a Department or Unit
• Keys to Effective Program-Level Assessment
• Counting Something Leads to Change in an Office or in a Classroom
• An Accountability Program Primer for Administrators
Whether you’re looking to completely change your approach to assessment, or simply improve the efficacy of your current assessment processes, we hope this report will help guide your discussions and eventual decisions.
Leadership Annotated Bibliography
This chapter examines the policy issues and challenges in planning and implementing e-learning in teacher education. The most significant issue is that implementing e-learning requires organizational and attitudinal change; in other words, e-learning requires the understanding and support of a wide range of stakeholders if it is to be successfully implemented. This chapter looks
at why e-learning requires organizational and attitudinal change, and suggests some strategies for bringing about such change.
This paper explores the evolution of digital communication skills development in post-secondary educational institutions around the world. It considers how expectations of and opportunities for effective digital communicators extend well beyond the domain of graphic and visual artists, videographers, and web designers. Today, competencies that have traditionally been expected from art and design professionals are now expected from professionals working in such disciplines as journalism, education, and medicine.
The emergence of new post-secondary fields of study such as informatics, medical imaging, instructional design, and educational technology, featuring digital proficiencies as core components of discipline-specific epistemology, further extends the notion of what it means to be a proficient digital communicator.
The Evolution of Literacy
Today’s focus on building capacity for effectively communicating ideas and information extends beyond the traditional notion of literacy. Historically, literacy was defined as the ability to read and write. In the current era, a literate individual is one who has developed competencies that leverage reading and writing skills toward the goal of effective communication. In today’s world, a proficient communicator needs to be computer literate, visually literate, information literate, media literate, and digitally literate.
To be computer literate, one must know how to use a word-processing program, a spreadsheet program, a slide-presentation program, and how to perform the appropriate maintenance and security to ensure that his or her computer works properly. Visually literate individuals understand the nature of images and multimedia and comprehend how visual representations are created, produced manipulated, and shared.
Being information literate entails knowing how to find, analyze, and share accurate information coming from valid and authoritative sources. A media literate person has a deep understanding of the means by which communications are created and shared. This includes mass media, such as newspapers and online news sources; television; magazines; websites; and “long tail” interactive social media, including RSS, blogs, wikis, and micro-blogging applications for Twitter. The boundaries of digital literacy continues to morph and change as the digital world around us morphs and changes. The 2010 United States Department of Education’s National Technology Plan recently observed that our education system relies on core sets of standards-based concepts and competencies to form the basis of what all students should know and should be able to do. Whether the domain is English language arts, mathematics, sciences, social studies, history, art, or music, states should continue to consider the integration of 21st-century competencies and expertise, such as critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, multimedia communication, and technological competencies demonstrated by professionals in various
disciplines. (http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf )
To help with the task of bounding expectations, some professional associations are providing guidelines to members that situate definitions and standards for practice under the purview of the association issuing the guidelines. For example, the International Society of Technology in Education’s (ISTE) National Educational Technology Standards for Students (NETS−S) gives K-12 teachers a framework for guiding skill development in elementary and secondary schools. NETS-S suggests that the digitally literate student knows how to use technologies in socially acceptable ways and has a healthy understanding concerning privacy and safety issues. The digitally literate student can also demonstrate creativity and innovation, create new knowledge collaboratively in a face-to-face environment and at a distance, think critically, and use technology effectively and productively in order to share the results of such efforts.
International Ph.D. students at U. of Western Ontario say their program can't be completed in four years, and that without fifth year of funding they risk having to leave empty-handed.