Why
are we Assessing General Education at NC State?
by Mike
Carter,
Associate Professor of English, NCSU
When
we think of general education at NC State, we think of the General
Education Requirements (GERs), the extensive list of courses in
different academic categories that outlines our collective sense
of a general education for all students. But general education
is not just a list of various required courses; it is an experience
that shapes our students, offering them a wider comprehension of
their lives and a solid foundation for being an effective citizen
and professional in a diverse and changing world. General education
is one of the key defining experiences of an education at NC State.
It
is precisely because general education plays such an important
role at our university that it must be assessed. This was clear
in the original discussions that founded the present GERs and remains
clear today. Assessment is critical in providing a way to determine
how well the general education program is achieving its aims and
also how to improve the program so that it can better meet those
aims. But it is also clear that such a large program that includes
so many departments represents a challenge for meaningful assessment,
one that will attain both of the goals of assessing the program.
The
Council for Undergraduate Education (CUE) has taken up that challenge
and created a viable plan for assessing the GERs. The plan involves
both the CUE, which is the administrative body that oversees and
is responsible for evaluating the GERs, and faculty teaching GER
courses. Without the involvement of the former, the assessment
would lack the necessary broad vision of the general education
program as a whole. And without the involvement of the latter,
the assessment would lack any meaningful way of improving the general
education experience of students in GER classes.
Thus,
GER assessment takes place on two levels. The CUE has created a
set of general GER objectives outlining certain kinds of learning
that define each of the GER academic categories. The faculty teaching
GER courses will generate learning outcomes for their courses,
outcomes that enable students in their classes to meet the objectives
for the appropriate GER category. Faculty will then assess their
courses as GER courses, in terms of their students' ability to
meet the GER objectives, and report the findings of their assessment
and any changes they will make in the course to improve students'
learning.
The
chief advantage of this two-pronged approach is that it provides
the means of both assessing the GERs as a whole and improving individual
GER courses. There are other advantages for faculty accruing from
GER objectives. One is that they ensure a greater consistency across
courses within a GER category; academic advisors can be sure that
any course their students take in a particular category will share
certain basic objectives. Another advantage is that the objectives
provide the criteria faculty must use to propose a course for a
GER category; previously the standards for inclusion in (or exclusion
from) GER categories have been obscure. Now, faculty know precisely
what they must do on course action forms: demonstrate that their
proposed courses contain learning outcomes and assessment instruments
that are specifically aligned to all the GER objectives in the
appropriate category.