Different Paths to Full Professor at Ohio State University

At Ohio State University, president E. Gordon Gee, and many faculty, want to rewrite the rules for tenure to essentially allow a dual track: Those who excel at research and those who excel at teaching. Scott Jaschik outlines the concept in Inside Higher Ed (lots of interesting comments):

[T]he key missing element to giving teaching and service a fair shot at equal consideration in promotions to full professor is measurement of impact, which is easier for research. He said that if good criteria could be developed, not only would teaching-related activities be rewarded, but so would research that has practical use.

"Measuring impact is always difficult, particularly when it comes to teaching and service," he said. "But it can be done if we focus on the significance of these activities as it extends beyond our own institution -- just as we expect such broad effects with traditional scholarship. Thus, indicators of impact on other institutions, recognition by professional associations, broad adoption of teaching materials (textbooks, software, etc.) by other institutions, evidence of effects on policy formulation and so on -- all these are appropriate independent indicators of effectiveness."

---

Regional SCUP Events! Enjoy the F2F company of your colleagues and peers at one of three SCUP regional conferences this spring:

• March 14–16: Baltimore, MD
• March 24–26: Cambridge, MA
• April 5–7, San Diego, CA

'Real Learning' Is Goal of AAC&U's 'Quality Imperative'

The American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) is sharing data and analysis from its recent survey of employers, asking them what they want in their college grads. Along with the survey, AAC&U has released a statement, The Quality Imperative. In the USA Today story there is a hint, at the end, of the tension pervading concerns about what learning outcomes should be sought after by federal policy. The AAC&U is concerned about "programs that provide narrow training or short-term credentials ," which a spokesperson for the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) says that students often come to school asking "for just the beef" because it relates to a new job.

We have the following links for SCUPers:

• USA Today coverage;
• The AAC&U Press Release;
• The recent survey data, Raising the Bar: Employers' Views on College Learning in the Wake of the Economic Downturn (PDF); and
• The AAC&U's formal statement, The Quality Imperative (PDF).

From the latter:

The quality of individuals’ actual learning is the most important resource we have as a society. To build a global future, the United States must erase the educational dividing lines that were designed long ago for a far more parochial and socially stratified world.

It is not just wrong but risky to provide a 360-degree education to some Americans and a much more blinkered form of training to others. A great nation needs and deserves more.

In today’s far more competitive global environment, we must work together toward standards that, once and for all, make excellence truly inclusive, not just in the schools, but in postsecondary education as well. Quality must drive our commitment to college completion, both for the economy and for our future as a great democracy.

---

Regional SCUP Events! Enjoy the F2F company of your colleagues and peers at one of three SCUP regional conferences this spring:

• March 14–16: Baltimore, MD
• March 24–26: Cambridge, MA
• April 5–7, San Diego, CA

'Credit Hours' or 'Chunks of Learning'?

Credit hours? Chunks of learning? The Chronicle's Goldie Blumenstyk observes that the recent angst between the DOE's Inspector General and the North Central's Higher Learning Commission has given new life to the question of "credit hours." Are they outdated? A relic? Do they do more harm than good?

Along the way, Blumenstyk mentions an interesting Lumina-backed effort to create a new college ecosystem (DGREE, it has a conference going on this week), touches base with Carol A. Twigg at NCAT, and notes an internal Department of Education initiative to redefine "credit hour":

Meanwhile, the Education Department may itself take that step. Last month, during negotiations with 16 representatives of colleges and associations over new rules to govern federal student aid, the department proposed its own credit-hour definition, based on the Carnegie Unit (one credit would equal one hour of class time or direct faculty instruction and two hours of out-of-class work per week for approximately 15 weeks; in cases where there was no formal class, the college, with the accord of its accreditor, could establish equivalents). It's uncertain if this proposal will be adopted. Negotiators are expected to vote on the credit-hour definition, along with other proposed rules, in late January.

---

Regional SCUP Events! Enjoy the F2F company of your colleagues and peers at one of three SCUP regional conferences this spring:

• March 14–16: Baltimore, MD
• March 24–26: Cambridge, MA
• April 5–7, San Diego, CA

Measure, Measure, Measure . . . Then What?

Scott Jaschick of Inside Higher Ed recently spent some time listening to folks heavily engaged in various assessment activities. He writes here about NSSE, National Survey of Student Engagement, and here about a report from the National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA).

• NSSE
• NILOA

The latter study found that the top use of assessment data is, no surprise, for another form of assessment: accreditation. The NSSE folks and the NILOA folks, according to Jaschik, each would like to see more use of assessment data in order to effect change. The Wabash National Study of Liberal Arts Education finds success can be had by using NSSE assessment data to effect change. The NILOA report, which can be found in its entirety here, breaks down assessment data in a number of use type categories and in a number of institutional categories.

NSSE

NILOA

It's the Learning, Stupid: Learning Matters Most!

This is the Howard R. Bowen Lecture given by Lumina Foundation president Jamie P. Merisotis at Claremont Graduate University on October 14:

Learning doesn't just matter. It matters most . . . All of these efforts, and others that I lack time to mention today, are rooted in and serve to amplify two basic truths: The first is that learning - all types of learning - can be objectively measured. And the second is that these measurements are absolutely vital in ensuring the relevance and value of a college credential.

What’s Wrong With Boasting About CLA Scores?

Kevin Carey asks an interesting question to enliven an ongoing debate: If we can brag about football team scores, why not student learning outcomes scores? (The observations by commenters are definitely worth the read!)

I’ve been preparing to obsessively follow the highly-ranked Buckeyes football team from the pre-season all the way to the traditional blowout loss in the National Championship game on January 8th. But this year my loyalties are divided. I have a new favorite team: the aptly-named Mavericks of the University of Nebraska at Omaha, which recently had the temerity to issue a press release announcing that it may be doing a particularly good job of helping its students learn.

Oh, the controversy! By citing its unusually high scores on the Collegiate Learning Assessment, UNO was either giving in to satanic temptation or paving the way for totalitarian dictatorship, depending on who you asked. “Shame,” said one anonymous commenter here at Inside Higher Ed. “Lies,” said another. “Gamesmanship,” said an official at the State University of New York at Binghamton, lamenting that his faculty’s hard work in developing local assessments would be undone. . . .

Apparently, it’s perfectly OK to boast about your performance on a measure that’s highly correlated with, and partially based on, how well your students did on a standardized test they took when they were juniors in high school. But a test of how much they learned after enrolling? Gamesmanship!