Introduction and Background:
Since the 2013-14 academic year, all 23 campuses of the California State University system have had the opportunity to develop and implement strategies to improve students learning through the course redesign in the Curriculum Redesign with Technology (CRT) program. The strategies employed by the CSU to improve learning in “bottleneck” courses have been recognized and endorsed in numerous settings, including the California state government, national higher educational organizations and publications, and practitioners.
Over the five years of the CRT program, it has evolved from a single program of Proven Course Redesign across six disciplinary areas, mostly in STEM fields, with six delineated approaches by lead faculty who had evidence of prior success, to a broader multidisciplinary (still STEM-heavy) program of Proven Course Redesign, with the addition of a program of support for Promising Course Redesign to pilot and explore new applications of technology, pedagogy, and high impact practices across multiple areas. In its most recent iteration, the focus merged Proven Redesigns with Promising Practices to create opportunities across disciplines, pedagogies, technologies, and practices to expand impact of redesigned learning more broadly.
Components of Evaluation:
Over the past five years, a significant component of the program has been ongoing evaluation and assessment. While much of the assessment is driven by campus, department, and course goals, and is documented in the e-Portfolios created for each course, The CRT team has also engaged in ongoing evaluation of the program. Indeed the results of some of the evaluations have driven the ways in which the program has evolved over the past five years.
Similar to the program evolution, the evaluation processes and measures have evolved. In the first year, each of the seven proven course redesign models was featured in an e-Learning academy during the summer of 2013, and the success of the first e-academies was evaluated by surveying participants, the development of a report of the outcomes of the survey, and a later assessment of the work achieved in the e-portfolios.
From that time on, additional components to assessment have been added and adapted. We have evolved to an approach that uses faculty e-Portfolios and surveys, Student Surveys, and Institutional Data as the primary basis for evaluation. Current components include:
- Annual evaluation of the opening Summer Institute, a week-long institute that began the course redesign process for all participants who worked in cohorts to begin transforming their courses;
- Evaluation of the mid-year survey of faculty participants of their progress in course redesign, evaluation of the usefulness of the one-day midyear meeting as a transition into the first course offering of the redesign;
- Evaluation of student survey feedback on initial offerings of newly redesigned courses or sections;
- Ongoing assessment of the quality and outcomes of the teaching and learning outcomes as documented in the final e-Portfolios for each course and participant. (Here is a link to the full list of individual CSU faculty e-Portfolios).
Much of the evaluation has focused on qualitative responses of faculty and students, but in addition, the team is gathering data about reductions in failure rates in courses through the course e-Portfolios.
Evaluation Reports and Documents
The following links highlight the larger efforts and reports. Additional information can be made available as needed, by contacting Kathy Fernandes, Senior Director of Learning Design and Technologies at the California State University, Office of the Chancellor.