Network-Based Approach to Assessment of Cognitive Skills

Abstract

Cognitive Assessment Redesign (CAR) project is an institution-wide, network-based approach to the development of cognitive skills in undergraduate education. This project aims to encourage first and fourth-year instructors to align skill development through the design of course assessments, to enhance cognitive skill acquisition and provide a measurement of learning. The learning outcomes for the project are framed and operationalized using the language and dimensions from the Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) rubrics. An assessment redesign network was created, matching assessment facilitators who have disciplinary and educational expertise with instructors to develop authentic assessments of student learning. One of the goals of the network is to encourage sustained participation and collaboration, and to build progression in teaching and learning throughout the institution. The project also includes a standardized test for comparison to course assessment outcomes. Testing at the fourth-year level has been dependent on the use of incentives for student participation. Although recruiting instructors from the faculty of Engineering and Applied Science was initially a challenge, course instructors have reported various successes stemming from participation in the project.

L’engagement et le rôle de l’ACEA dans les changements en matière d’évaluation

“…At the end of each semester, members of the project presented lightning talks, sharing their ideas, actions, issues and outcomes. Further details are available in the Guide for Institutional Assessment of Cognitive Skills (Simper et al, 2018).…”

Impact of Educational Interventions on an Engineering Faculty

“…A fifth approach uses externally funded projects that develop a network of instructors interested in redesigning their course assessments. These involve working with instructors to both improve the quality and alignment of their assessment activities while gathering data about student development throughout their program [18]- [20]. The approaches provide some flexibility to instructors, but much of the approach is prescribed by the research requirements.…”

Using Motivation Theory to Inform Engineering Course Design

“…Case Studies, Real-World Labs, Service Learning [26], [32], [15], [17], [28], [34], [31], [35] Course Delivery [26], [27], [29], [36], [37], [30], [33], [38], [39] Assessment [13], [16], [40], [41], [22], [42], [23], [43], [44] Theory Based or Survey Results [11], [45], [46], [47], [10], [19], [48], [1], [39], [49], [24], [25], [50], [51], [52] Out-of-class activities [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58] While there have been many successful interventions that improved student motivation discussed in the CEEA 2010-2018 proceedings, the relevant motivation theory behind each intervention is often missing. Understanding motivation theory may not be necessary ...…”