5/15/2006 1
Past, Present, and Future of Core Curriculum at MCLA
Presented at SoTL’s6th Annual Conference
May 18, 2006 London
Nancy Ovitsky, Ph.D.
Department of Business Administration & Economics
5/15/2006 2
MCLA Massachusetts College of Liberal
Arts• Small state public liberal arts college in
northwest corner of Massachusetts
• Area renowned for its natural beauty, cultural attractions and outdoor recreation
• College has 100 year history of programs in teaching, liberal arts, and the professions
5/15/2006 3
A 1000 Words
5/15/2006 4
A Brief(!) History of Core Curriculum Development at MCLA
• Pre-1992 – work done for several years on reforming General Education
• Fall 1992 – Undergraduate Experience Committee formed
• Spring 1993 – Assumptions, Desired Outcomes, and Criteria proposed
5/15/2006 5
History (cont)
Fall 1993 – Summer Study Group presents Three models:
1. Inquiry Model
2. Problems & Projects Model
3. Seminar-Based Model
5/15/2006 6
Inquiry Model
Senior & Junior
Interdisciplinary Inquiries into Contemporary Issues
(15 cr)
Soph Core
Modes of Inquiry (9 cr)
First Year Core
Growth of Knowledge (18 cr)
Natural Sciences Domain
Social Sciences Domain
Humanities Domain
5/15/2006 7
Problems & Projects Model
• First Year – Two multi-disciplinary seminars equal to 3 courses each (18 cr)
• Second Year – Two cluster courses, each consisting of 3 linked courses
• Junior Year – A single course on individual & society taken in the major
• Senior Year – A multi-disciplinary seminar on an ethical problem
5/15/2006 8
Seminar-Based Model
• 8 multi-disciplinary seminars distributed over 4 years
• First 4 semesters – one 6-credit seminar each semester
• Last 4 semesters – one 3-credit course each semester
5/15/2006 9
Fall 1993 – Assumptions, Desired Outcomes, Criteria for Revision
• Assumptions included our expectations of challenges our graduates would need to meet in the 21st century
• Desired Outcomes were the Knowledge, Perspectives, Abilities, and Values needed in the 21st century
5/15/2006 10
Desired Outcomes• Knowledge – be informed about perennial
human questions, possess sufficient knowledge to be qualified for a position in one’s chosen field
• Perspectives – historical - to understand long-run trends; cultural - for living in a diverse world; global - to be responsible 21st century citizen
5/15/2006 11
Desired Outcomes (cont.)
• Abilities – to think critically & creatively, to communicate effectively, including social skills; to become a lifelong learner; quantitative & computer-oriented; to access & evaluate information; to know how to ask the right questions & examine issues from multiple perspectives; capacity for aesthetic appreciation
5/15/2006 12
Desired Outcomes (cont.)
• Values – taking responsibility for defining one’s values & convictions, participating in the responsible play of ideas in the search for truth, striving for excellence in each undertaking, recognizing one’s responsibilities in an interdependent world
5/15/2006 13
Criteria for Gen Ed Revision
• Be a 4-year developmental curriculum
• Provide foundational knowledge & skills in different curriculum domains for subsequent interdisciplinary approach
• Challenge students to make connections
• Promote across-the-curriculum the development of communication and critical thinking skills
5/15/2006 14
Criteria for Gen Ed Revision (cont.)
• Enable students to access & manipulate data with computers
• Active learning as individuals & in collaboration with others
• Provide opportunities to integrate liberal arts & professional programs
• Increase awareness of diverse historical, cultural, ideological perspectives
5/15/2006 15
Criteria for Gen Ed Revision (cont.)
• Provide an understanding of the impact of science & technology on contemporary life
• Challenge students to understand the foundations of ethical judgments; understand & question their own value systems; carefully formulate their beliefs & values
• Account for the special needs of non-trads and transfer students
5/15/2006 16
Criteria for Gen Ed Revision (cont.)
• Be sufficiently distinctive to attract funding sources & higher quality students
• Have clear objectives for each curricular domain & level of the program
• Develop & implement evaluation procedures for these objectives which incorporate a variety of assessment techniques.
5/15/2006 17
Some Models We Reviewed
• Alverno College• Evergreen College• American University• Morse Academic Plan at New York Univer
sity• King's College• The Core Curriculum - Saint Joseph's Coll
ege
5/15/2006 18
History (cont)• 1993-1995 – Models considered; various
conversations, First Year Seminar a first step towards change
• 1995-1997 – revisited Gen Ed and re-certified courses for inclusion in Gen Ed
• 1997-2000 - Format of a Core Curriculum emerged and became refined into two models
5/15/2006 19
Major Institutional Change1997
• Changed name of institution from North Adams State College to Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts to reflect the adoption of the public liberal arts mission four years earlier
5/15/2006 20
Recent History – Core Curriculum
• 11-3-97 – General Education Subcommittee of the Curriculum Committee commences meeting. Its role: to examine current general education requirements and to make recommendations to the Curriculum Committee as to what changes should occur given the revised mission of the college as a premier liberal arts institution
5/15/2006 21
Recent History – Core Curriculum
• Continuing conversations throughout the 97-98 and 98-99 academic years resulted in the model on the next slide
• Spring 1999: Generic criteria approved for all domains. The first Tier 1 courses were piloted
• Spring & Summer 2000: faculty worked throughout to develop Tier 1 and Tier 2 courses
5/15/2006 22
Models – 2 versions into 1Capstone Course
Tier 2 Creative Arts
Tier 2 Human Heritage
Tier 2 Self & Society
Tier 2 Science & Tech
Tier 1 Creative Arts
Tier 1 Human Heritage
Tier 1 Self & Society
Tier 1 Science & Tech
Math Comp
Writing Comp
Computer Comp
Speech Comp
Language Comp
Tier 1 – Great Ideas
Tier 2 – More focused
Other model had Tiers reversed
5/15/2006 23
Recent History – Core Curriculum
• 2000 – decide on Core Curriculum model; pilot courses developed and offered; develop Domain criteria
• Spring 2001 – Curriculum and All College have close votes on implementation proceeding in Fall 2001; President decides we should proceed
5/15/2006 24
Recent History – Core Curriculum
• Fall 2001 – Entering Freshmen required to complete Core Curriculum
• 2001-2002 - Curriculum Committee and All College continue to consider approvals and reapprovals of Core Courses and deal with the myriad side effects, expected & unexpected, of Core implementation and Gen Ed phaseout
5/15/2006 25
Recent History – Core Curriculum
• Fall 2002 – Core Conversations – we learn we can keep faculty on campus on Friday afternoons!
• Fall 2003 - Conversations lead to suggestion to allow each student to opt out of one Domain; passes Curriculum but not ACC. Leads to a reexamination of what we want from Core Curriculum
5/15/2006 26
Proposed modifications
The All College Committee recommended in May 2003 that a
summer work group (SWG) should discuss the status of the
core curriculum, due to a consistent demand from
departments for discipline based courses
5/15/2006 27
• The summer work group reviewed material from previous work groups
• Generated a list of issues that had been identified as concerns
• Suggested changes in response to the issues and concerns identified
• Kept the campus community informed via e-mail on meeting updates, and welcomed comments and suggestions
• Held a college wide meeting early fall 2003 to inform the campus community.
Summer 2003
5/15/2006 28
Proposed Changes Fall 2003• Remove the term competency. Make the basic
skills part of the core. Move to become the first tier (Tier I)
• Combine 100 level courses and 200 level courses into Tier II
• Students required to take a total of eight courses, two from each of the four domains.
• Discipline based courses, as long as they meet the learning outcomes, can be submitted for core approval.
5/15/2006 29
2004-2006 Core Issues
• Approved various discipline based courses for Core designation
• Postponed Capstone implementation to Fall 2006 to allow time for development and staffing – ILP Project
• Required foreign language as of Fall 2006
• Expanded Math competency requirement
5/15/2006 30
MCLA Involvement in ILP• Submitted Proposal September 2003 –
work on outcomes and assessment of and proposals for Tier 3 Capstone Courses
• One of 10 institutions selected – out of 140 applicants
• Project covers 3 years – 3 January meetings and 3 July workshops 2004-2006
5/15/2006 31
Core Curriculum at MCLA Fall 2006
Tier I CompetenciesWriting Math Computer Literacy Foreign Language
Tier II Domain Courses2 courses from each domain
Human
Heritage
Self and
Society
Creative
Arts
Science and Technology
Tier IIICapstone to the Core
1 course incorporating at least two of the above domains
5/15/2006 32
Core Capstone
• Challenges students to integrate knowledge from several disciplines, applying academic learning and critical thinking skills to modern-day issues.
• Encourages students to work with others and become engaged citizens in the context of today's world.
5/15/2006 33
Connecting Institutional Outcomes to Course Learning Outcomes
Institutional Outcomes
School & Program-Level Outcomes including
Professional Accreditation Outcomes
Course/Service Learning Outcomes
• Cooperation & Collaboration between Academics and Student Affairs
• Student Ownership of their Learning
Connections we need to make to Tier 3 Core
Need to review these
5/15/2006 34
Pilot Core Capstone Courses
• Stipends were provided to six faculty in Summer 2005 for development of pilot capstone courses. Currently two faculty have applied for Summer 2006.
• Assessment of the capstone course will serve as assessment for our Core Curriculum program
5/15/2006 35
Pilot Capstone Courses 2005-2006• America on the World’s Stage: Angel or Devil? (History,
political and economic theory, philosophy, and literature are utilized to explore American foreign policy.)
• Culture, Power, and Protest (Social movements from the point of view of historians, political scientists, and environmentalists)
• The Robotic Incursion (Technology and society)• Science & Human Values (Emphasis on genetics and society)• Science & Spirit (Faith and spirituality in this technological
age)• Foster Care & Adoption (Sociology meets local politics and
economics)
5/15/2006 36
Summer 2006 proposals
• Course in women's poetry to explore how women have used lyrical voices to understand and explain their lives.
• Course in language and censorship looking at first amendment issues (this faculty member is nationally known for his work on cursing).
5/15/2006 37
Related Institutional Initiatives
• MCLA's 4th Annual Undergraduate Research Conference - April 13, 2006. Students presented their research in either a poster format or as a short talk.
• Service Learning – Important aspect of MCLA education
• Berkshire Compact for Higher Education – Countywide collaboration on education K-16
5/15/2006 38
Who’s in Charge of this Show (and what have they done lately)?
• Faculty Professional Development Team (Nuts and Bolts)• College Curriculum Committee (Governance Approval)• Dean of Academic Affairs ($)
•Faculty Professional Development Team: Recruited faculty to teach pilot capstone courses. Will oversee and guide course approval/implementation and future recruitment efforts.Curriculum Committee: approved pilot courses and CCAP courses to be offered beginning Fall 2006Dean of Academic Affairs: Found some extra cash laying around.
5/15/2006 39
Professional Development Activities for Core and Assessment
• November 2004: 6 faculty members attended seminar presentation by Peggy Maki at Salve Regina
• March 2005: Day of Assessment for all faculty at MCLA by Dick Gerber, President, New England Educational Assessment Network
• September 2005: Martha Stassen (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) presented assessment activities for all faculty
• Pilot courses presented to campus November 2005 and April 2006
5/15/2006 40
Assessment of Tier I
Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts
Core Curriculum
5/15/2006 41
Mean Grades by ProfessorCreative Arts
Professor
Mea
n G
rade
4
3
2
1
Human Heritage
Professor
Mea
n G
rade
4
3
2
1
Self and Society
Professor
Mea
n G
rade
4
3
2
1
Science and Technology
Professor
Mea
n G
rade
4
3
2
1
5/15/2006 42
Expected Grade and Interest
Ending Interest by Expected Grade
ABCD
Pe
rce
nt
100
80
60
40
20
0
High
Mod.
Low
47341111
42
55
5411
1111
35
78
• Expected grade correlates with end-of-semester interest (τ = .33; p < .001
• Not much difference between A and B grades
• Expected grade also correlates with initial interest (τ = .16; p < .001
5/15/2006 43
Student Opinion• Students have mainly a “moderate” opinion of
the Core and mostly take its courses to fulfill requirements.
• The “end-semester” interest level is generally higher than the initial level.
• Student opinion varies significantly by domain and course.
• Since discipline courses were added to Core, they are rated higher on interest level.
5/15/2006 44
Summary of Assessment• Students appear mainly satisfied with Core
experience, based on questionnaires and grades
• Questionnaires provide means for professors to compare with peers (unlike previous Gen Ed program)
• Faculty and student concerns - grade inflation (leniency), unequal workload, highly variable standards, and high variability in classroom techniques
5/15/2006 45
Issues for Future of Core
• Tight Staffing – reason Capstone was postponed, still an issue
• Impact of discipline specific courses on integrity of the Core
• Assessment, assessment, assessment!
• Intentional learning – creating a campus culture
5/15/2006 46
As our oldest building is renewed, so too our Core Curriculum…