WASC Proposal - Revision history

Murray at 21:12, 26 October 2006

2006-10-26T21:12:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 26 October 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{WASC heading}}
	{{righttoc}}<font color=red>This is a draft of the proposal that will be sent to David Goodstein for inclusion in the overall WASC proposal from Caltech. Our part should be between 2 and 3 pages. This text can be editted by logging on to the wiki and clicking the edit button.</font>		{{righttoc}}<font color=red>This is a draft of the proposal that will be sent to David Goodstein for inclusion in the overall WASC proposal from Caltech. Our part should be between 2 and 3 pages. This text can be editted by logging on to the wiki and clicking the edit button.</font>

Murray: /* Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program */

2006-08-28T02:12:01Z

Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:12, 28 August 2006
Line 57:		Line 57:

	<font color=blue>		<font color=blue>
	The 1998 WASC review identified several issues that directly affect the undergraduate program. The issue of diversity (of both the faculty and the student body) was identified as a challenge and this continues to present a challenge for Caltech. After an initial increase, the number of women in the undergraduate body has flattened out at between 30 adn 40%, depending on the year. The number of underrepresented minorities in the undergraduates remains very low and is a great area of concern for the faculty. There has been significant progress in the recruiting and retention of women and minority faculty and this provides a somewhat better situation for recruiting students. More generally, the 1998 WASC Visiting Committee encouraged Caltech to continue its active recruiting through faculty involvement and competitive financial aid packages. The previous review also noted the desireability of providing more outlets for students interested in performing arts.		The 1998 WASC review identified several issues that directly affect the undergraduate program. The issue of diversity (of both the faculty and the student body) was identified as a challenge and this continues to present a challenge for Caltech. After an initial increase, the number of women in the undergraduate body has flattened out at between 30 adn 40%, depending on the year. The number of underrepresented minorities in the undergraduates remains very low and is a great area of concern for the faculty. There has been significant progress in the recruiting and retention of women and minority faculty and this provides a somewhat better situation for recruiting students. More generally, the 1998 WASC Visiting Committee encouraged Caltech to continue its active recruiting through faculty involvement and competitive financial aid packages. The previous review also noted the desireability of providing more outlets for students interested in performing arts. . Finally, the Visiting Committee suggested that we consider revision of the Humanities and Social Sciences core curriculum.
	</font>		</font>

Murray: /* Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program */

2006-08-28T01:57:41Z

Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, 28 August 2006
Line 56:		Line 56:
	Teaching assignments and course evaluations are the responsibility of the individual Divisions at Caltech. Most Divisions delegate the responsibility for teaching assignments to the Executive Officer for each option, who is the faculty member responsible for the undergraduate (and also graduate) degree program in a given area. Teaching evaluations are handed out in all undergraduate courses and are returned to the Division Chair, who is responsible for faculty evaluation and raises. A new online course survey is currently being developed for courses that are part of the core curriclum, which provides more detailed feedback to instructors.		Teaching assignments and course evaluations are the responsibility of the individual Divisions at Caltech. Most Divisions delegate the responsibility for teaching assignments to the Executive Officer for each option, who is the faculty member responsible for the undergraduate (and also graduate) degree program in a given area. Teaching evaluations are handed out in all undergraduate courses and are returned to the Division Chair, who is responsible for faculty evaluation and raises. A new online course survey is currently being developed for courses that are part of the core curriclum, which provides more detailed feedback to instructors.

			<font color=blue>
	The 1998 WASC review identified several issues that directly affect the undergraduate program. The issue of diversity (of both the faculty and the student body) was identified as a challenge and this continues to present a challenge for Caltech. After an initial increase, the number of women in the undergraduate body has flattened out at between 30 adn 40%, depending on the year. The number of underrepresented minorities in the undergraduates remains very low and is a great area of concern for the faculty. There has been significant progress in the recruiting and retention of women and minority faculty and this provides a somewhat better situation for recruiting students. More generally, the 1998 WASC Visiting Committee encouraged Caltech to continue its active recruiting through faculty involvement and competitive financial aid packages. The previous review also noted the desireability of providing more outlets for students interested in performing arts.		The 1998 WASC review identified several issues that directly affect the undergraduate program. The issue of diversity (of both the faculty and the student body) was identified as a challenge and this continues to present a challenge for Caltech. After an initial increase, the number of women in the undergraduate body has flattened out at between 30 adn 40%, depending on the year. The number of underrepresented minorities in the undergraduates remains very low and is a great area of concern for the faculty. There has been significant progress in the recruiting and retention of women and minority faculty and this provides a somewhat better situation for recruiting students. More generally, the 1998 WASC Visiting Committee encouraged Caltech to continue its active recruiting through faculty involvement and competitive financial aid packages. The previous review also noted the desireability of providing more outlets for students interested in performing arts.
			</font>

	==== <font color=blue>Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process</font> ====		==== <font color=blue>Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process</font> ====

Murray: /* Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program */

2006-08-28T01:54:32Z

Overview of Caltech Undergraduate Educational Program

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:54, 28 August 2006
Line 56:		Line 56:
	Teaching assignments and course evaluations are the responsibility of the individual Divisions at Caltech. Most Divisions delegate the responsibility for teaching assignments to the Executive Officer for each option, who is the faculty member responsible for the undergraduate (and also graduate) degree program in a given area. Teaching evaluations are handed out in all undergraduate courses and are returned to the Division Chair, who is responsible for faculty evaluation and raises. A new online course survey is currently being developed for courses that are part of the core curriclum, which provides more detailed feedback to instructors.		Teaching assignments and course evaluations are the responsibility of the individual Divisions at Caltech. Most Divisions delegate the responsibility for teaching assignments to the Executive Officer for each option, who is the faculty member responsible for the undergraduate (and also graduate) degree program in a given area. Teaching evaluations are handed out in all undergraduate courses and are returned to the Division Chair, who is responsible for faculty evaluation and raises. A new online course survey is currently being developed for courses that are part of the core curriclum, which provides more detailed feedback to instructors.

	~~<font color=blue>'''Add list~~ of ~~issues~~ identified by previous ~~reviews regarding undergraduate education here'''</font>~~		The 1998 WASC review identified several issues that directly affect the undergraduate program. The issue of diversity (of both the faculty and the student body) was identified as a challenge and this continues to present a challenge for Caltech. After an initial increase, the number of women in the undergraduate body has flattened out at between 30 adn 40%, depending on the year. The number of underrepresented minorities in the undergraduates remains very low and is a great area of concern for the faculty. There has been significant progress in the recruiting and retention of women and minority faculty and this provides a somewhat better situation for recruiting students. More generally, the 1998 WASC Visiting Committee encouraged Caltech to continue its active recruiting through faculty involvement and competitive financial aid packages. The previous review also noted the desireability of providing more outlets for students interested in performing arts.

	==== <font color=blue>Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process</font> ====		==== <font color=blue>Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process</font> ====

Murray: /* Initial Implementation */

2006-08-28T01:44:54Z

Initial Implementation

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:44, 28 August 2006
Line 175:		Line 175:

	<hr>		<hr>
			<br>

	{\| width=100% border=1		{\| width=100% border=1
Line 180:		Line 181:
	\| <center>'''The text below this point is not part of the formal proposal. It is included here as background information on other issues that came up and were left out of the final proposal'''</center>		\| <center>'''The text below this point is not part of the formal proposal. It is included here as background information on other issues that came up and were left out of the final proposal'''</center>
	\|}		\|}

			<br>

	=== Recommandations from 1998 WASC review ===		=== Recommandations from 1998 WASC review ===

Murray: /* Unused Material */

2006-08-28T01:44:24Z

Unused Material

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:44, 28 August 2006
Line 175:		Line 175:

	<hr>		<hr>

			{\| width=100% border=1
			\|- bgcolor=red
			\| <center>'''The text below this point is not part of the formal proposal. It is included here as background information on other issues that came up and were left out of the final proposal'''</center>
			\|}

			=== Recommandations from 1998 WASC review ===
			* The Visiting Committee notes the progress in recruiting and retaining femail graduate students but finds that progress is not as positive with underrepresented minorities, and suggests that Caltech continue to develop strategies to address this circumstance.
			* The Visiting Committee suggests that Catlech provide adequiate support in English as a Second Language to improve the ability of graduate students working with undergraduates to communicate adequately in English.
			* The Visiting Committee suggests that Caltech continue its efforts to track its graduates, perhaps merging databases with the Alumni Office, in order to address this issue [effectiveness of services for grauate students seeking nontraditional jobs] more compreshensively and systematically.
			* The Visiting Committee notes that the Institute is commited to sustaning this program [SURF], and suggestions that efforts be continued to increase the endowment of the SURF program.
			* The Visiting Committee recommends that students more regularly find ways to explore and clarify how the Code should apply to their relationships with each other, and speak to their desired ideals of a community.
			* The Visiting Committee recommends that those most responsible for the Honor Code reach out to students at other institutions with similar responsibilities to learn more, as they will, about the social implications of Honor Codes.
			* The Visiting Committee suggests that the Instiute consider the revision of the Humanities and Social Sciences Core with the same intensity of focus as it has considered the science Core.
			* The Visiting committee encourages Caltech's continued diligence to recruiting and retenion (of underrepresented students) and to life on campus. [Specifically meniotns increasing diversity of the faculty.]
			* The Visiting Committee encourages Caltech to continue its active recruiting. The faculty involement during the last cycle had noticeable positive results. The Financial Aid packages are being made more competitive. The Institute should continue to look for the best ways to attract and retain a high-quality and inclusive student body.
			* The Visiting Committee encourages Caltech to pursue these initiatives [in arts and performing], which will add to campus cultural and intellectual life.

	=== Unused Material ===		=== Unused Material ===

Murray: /* Data Collection */

2006-08-24T16:23:46Z

Data Collection

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:23, 24 August 2006
Line 136:		Line 136:
	''Class surveys'' - Caltech surveys incoming freshman and outgoing seniors each year. The surveys for 2006 have already been updated to include questions on some of the issues raised above and we can add additional questions to the 2007 and 2008 surveys as the self study progresses.		''Class surveys'' - Caltech surveys incoming freshman and outgoing seniors each year. The surveys for 2006 have already been updated to include questions on some of the issues raised above and we can add additional questions to the 2007 and 2008 surveys as the self study progresses.

	''Course surveys'' - In addition to surveys of an entire undergraduate class, Caltech also has course evaluations for individual courses. A new online course evaluation is being used for the core curriculum and this can be used to collect data regarding to those specific courses. Data from both the online surveys and the paper surveys will be available to the committee.		''Course surveys'' - In addition to surveys of an entire undergraduate class, Caltech also has course evaluations for individual courses. A new online course evaluation is being used for the core curriculum and this can be used to collect data regarding to those specific courses. Data from both the online surveys and the paper surveys will be available to the committee. <font color=blue> We will use our core curriculum course to evaluate the development and assessment of learning outcomes that are tied to Institutional objectives.</font>

	''Requirements analysis'' - To understand student workload issues, course scheduling and related issues, we will work with the registrar's office to analyze the courses taken by Caltech undergraduates over the past several years.		''Requirements analysis'' - To understand student workload issues, course scheduling and related issues, we will work with the registrar's office to analyze the courses taken by Caltech undergraduates over the past several years.

Murray: /* Teaching Quality */

2006-08-24T15:58:35Z

Teaching Quality

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 24 August 2006
Line 72:		Line 72:
	While there are many excellent teachers at Caltech, there are also examples of courses that are poorly taught and instructors who could do a much better job in their teaching performance. At the present time, there are relatively few resources available for Caltech faculty who want to improve their teaching and limited feedback mechanisms for improving the teaching effectiveness. In our initial discussions, we have identified several aspects of teaching quality that we believe should be further studied:		While there are many excellent teachers at Caltech, there are also examples of courses that are poorly taught and instructors who could do a much better job in their teaching performance. At the present time, there are relatively few resources available for Caltech faculty who want to improve their teaching and limited feedback mechanisms for improving the teaching effectiveness. In our initial discussions, we have identified several aspects of teaching quality that we believe should be further studied:

	''Course Feedback'' - How do faculty get feedback on their courses, both during the term and after the term? Can course surveys, web sites, student lunches and other mechanisms be used to provide instructors more information about whether the students are understanding the material and whether the teaching methods are effective?		''Course Feedback'' - How do faculty get feedback on their courses <font>and whether their have achieved their desired learning outcomes</font>, both during the term and after the term? Can course surveys, web sites, student lunches and other mechanisms be used to provide instructors more information about whether the students are understanding the material and whether the teaching methods are effective?

	''Teacher Training'' - How can Caltech usefully provide information to teachers about best practices for effective teaching, available resources and technologies, and integration of the honor system into their courses?		''Teacher Training'' - How can Caltech usefully provide information to teachers about best practices for effective teaching, available resources and technologies, and integration of the honor system into their courses?
Line 81:		Line 81:

	<font color=blue>'''Specific Outcomes''': Based on our discussions, we have identified the following specific outcomes from the accreditation review process:		<font color=blue>'''Specific Outcomes''': Based on our discussions, we have identified the following specific outcomes from the accreditation review process:
	* Establish new processes and tools for providing feedback to instructors to improve their teaching effectiveness.		* Establish new processes and tools for providing feedback to instructors to improve their teaching effectiveness and enhance learning outcomes.
	* Recommend and implement incentive structures that reward effective teaching.		* Recommend and implement incentive structures that reward effective teaching.
	* Identify and establish one or more new mechanisms for teaching methods to be disseminated to Caltech faculty.		* Identify and establish one or more new mechanisms for teaching methods to be disseminated to Caltech faculty. Closely tie these methods to specific learning outcomes that are identified by the faculty and students.
	</font>		</font>

Murray: /* Teaching Quality */

2006-08-24T15:56:53Z

Teaching Quality

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:56, 24 August 2006
Line 78:		Line 78:
	''Faculty Incentives'' - Traditional teaching incentives (awards, salary increases) typically reward the best teachers but may not influence the bulk distribution of teaching. Are there incentives that can be provided to increase the average quality of teaching across the campus? Are there disincentives that can be provided to motivate those faculty that intentionally neglect their teaching responsibilities? How can faculty be assigned to the types of courses that best fit their style and abilities?		''Faculty Incentives'' - Traditional teaching incentives (awards, salary increases) typically reward the best teachers but may not influence the bulk distribution of teaching. Are there incentives that can be provided to increase the average quality of teaching across the campus? Are there disincentives that can be provided to motivate those faculty that intentionally neglect their teaching responsibilities? How can faculty be assigned to the types of courses that best fit their style and abilities?

	''~~New Methods~~'' - How might Caltech explore new methods of teaching, such as active learning, lecture-less classes and project-based courses? What new technologies might we consider for incorporation into courses and how do we provide information about these technologies to interested faculty.		<font color=blue>''Learning Outcomes''</font> - How might Caltech explore new methods of teaching, such as active learning, lecture-less classes and project-based courses<font color=blue>, that improve our teaching effectiveness and enhance specific learning outcomes</font>? What new technologies might we consider for incorporation into courses and how do we provide information about these technologies to interested faculty.

	<font color=blue>'''Specific Outcomes''': Based on our discussions, we have identified the following specific outcomes from the accreditation review process:		<font color=blue>'''Specific Outcomes''': Based on our discussions, we have identified the following specific outcomes from the accreditation review process:

Murray: /* Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process */

2006-08-24T15:54:53Z

<font color=blue>Expected Outcomes of the Accreditation Review Process</font>

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 24 August 2006
Line 62:		Line 62:
	<font color=green>'''Proposal development process:''' A description of how representatives of the institution’s constituencies were involved in the development and internal approval of the Proposal and how they will be involved subsequently in the review process. It is expected that key institutional leadership, especially the faculty leadership, have been involved in the design of the proposal, the format of review, the selection of special themes, the method of inquiry, and the most significant indicators that will be developed as evidence. </font>		<font color=green>'''Proposal development process:''' A description of how representatives of the institution’s constituencies were involved in the development and internal approval of the Proposal and how they will be involved subsequently in the review process. It is expected that key institutional leadership, especially the faculty leadership, have been involved in the design of the proposal, the format of review, the selection of special themes, the method of inquiry, and the most significant indicators that will be developed as evidence. </font>

	<font color=blue>A committee of 5 faculty and ~~4 students~~ was established to develop our proposal for self-study in undergraduate education. Richard Murray, a former Division Chair (dean) of Engineering and Applied Science at Caltech, serves as the chair of the committee and its faculty representatives have been recognized by both the students and the administration for their teaching abilities and committment to undergraduate education. The undergraduates on the committee are members of the Academic Research Committee (ARC), a committee established by the student body to help improve education and research opportunities for Caltech. ARC is also responsible for organizing the bi-annual Student Faculty Conference, which will be an integral part of the data collection and decision making process. The committee met several times during the course of the academic year to discuss the topics of most interest to students and faculty and the chair of the committee met with the Undergraduate Academic Standards and Honors (UASH) committee, the Core Curriculum Steering Committee (CCSC) and the undergraduate deans.</font>		<font color=blue>A committee of 6 faculty and 3 undergraduates was established to develop our proposal for self-study in undergraduate education. Richard Murray, a former Division Chair (dean) of Engineering and Applied Science at Caltech, serves as the chair of the committee and its faculty representatives have been recognized by both the students and the administration for their teaching abilities and committment to undergraduate education. The undergraduates on the committee are members of the Academic Research Committee (ARC), a committee established by the student body to help improve education and research opportunities for Caltech. ARC is also responsible for organizing the bi-annual Student Faculty Conference, which will be an integral part of the data collection and decision making process. The committee met several times during the course of the academic year to discuss the topics of most interest to students and faculty and the chair of the committee met with the Undergraduate Academic Standards and Honors (UASH) committee, the Core Curriculum Steering Committee (CCSC) and the undergraduate deans.</font>

	Based on discussions over the course of 6 months, the committee identified many potential areas for study. To help insure that we are able to make positive progress, we have identified two specific areas where we plan to focus our efforts<font color=blue>: teaching quality and undergraduate workload</font>. In each of these areas, we feel that a thorough assessment of Caltech's educational program would be timely and could lead to constructive changes in the undergraduate program. <font color=blue>The recommendations of the committee were discussed with the chair of the Council on Undergraduate Education (CUE) and the WASC Steering Committee and their feedback was incorporated into the final proposal.</font>		Based on discussions over the course of 6 months, the committee identified many potential areas for study. To help insure that we are able to make positive progress, we have identified two specific areas where we plan to focus our efforts<font color=blue>: teaching quality and undergraduate workload</font>. In each of these areas, we feel that a thorough assessment of Caltech's educational program would be timely and could lead to constructive changes in the undergraduate program. <font color=blue>The recommendations of the committee were discussed with the chair of the Council on Undergraduate Education (CUE) and the WASC Steering Committee and their feedback was incorporated into the final proposal.</font>