LINKING COURSE PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES TO PROGRAM GOALS

Introduction

Program or outcome assessment is an accepted requirement in most academic institutions. The Council on Post­Secondary Accreditation in the US Department of Educa­tion has mandated that accrediting agencies use outcome assessments in evaluating their programs. In addition, the six regional associations for schools and colleges are requir­ing outcome assessments as part of the requirements for granting or renewing accreditation. As a result, the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) and the Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) are including assessment outcomes as part of their require­ments for accreditation. All construction programs, whether accredited or not, must examine outcome assessments and develop procedures to meet the assessment requirements.

Several articles have been published dealing with outcome assessment models or program assessment for construction programs (Slobojan, 1992, Yoakum, 1994, and Shahbodaghlou, 1994). Each of these articles outlines the procedures for developing outcome assessment based on the mission and strategic plan of the institution and program. The program mission is written, then goals and objectives are developed to drive the achievement of the mission. Shahbodaghlou (1994) outlines measurable objectives for each program goal and identifies how the objectives will be measured and data collected. Youkurn, (1994) concentrates on the process and developing the criteria for a reasonable yet simple plan. Slobdjan (1991) addresses establishing outcome assessment at the program level including three categories of objectives-demographic, attitudinal and per­formance objectives. Although these authors establish reasonable and well thought out processes there still re­mains the question: how do the course content and perfor­mance outcomes tie to program goals and objectives, ulti­mately supporting the mission of the program, college and institution?

Currently, construction faculty across the nation are devel­oping assessment outcomes for their programs that are part of the over-all assessment process for the institution. At the same time, many are developing performance outcomes for their courses to meet accreditation requirements. In many cases, these two endeavors are viewed as separate, unrelated activities. This paper will explain how course performance outcomes can be tied to the program goals and objectives while at the same time becoming the foundation for the institutional assessment plan.

Program Planning and Assessment Process

Atypical program planning and assessment process include the institutional, college, and program levels as shown in Figure 1. An institutional mission statement is written and a strategic plan developed. Next, the college and program levels develop their mission, goals, and outcomes. Most faculty have a limited and superficial involvement in the process at the college and institutional level. As a result, faculty buy-in is minimal. Flaws in the system develop when the educators fail to ask how the program and college level's impact and drive the mission, goals, and objectives of the institution.

If the planning and assessment process is expanded to the course level as shown in Figure 2, everyone teaching a course would have the responsibility of connecting what is taught to the mission, goals, and outcomes of the program, college and institution. The process shown in Figure 2 also includes two other components.   Inform-ation input from advisory committees, students, graduates and industry is asked for at the program and course levels. Also, the general education component of the institution that encompasses the whole educational process is integrated into the mission, goals and performance outcomes at each level. Thus, each educator has the responsibility to identify and include comprehensive course content. Likewise, such input from industry, graduates, and students helps educators keep the content current and pertinent, thus producing a graduate who meets the mission, goals, and outcomes of the program, college and institution. The general education component, common to all institutions, is that aspect of education that develops a well-rounded educated graduate. These individuals will thrive today and in the future. The general education component is an integral part of the mission, goals and outcomes at all levels. In conjunction with the course content, the general education component produces an individual who will meet the needs and challenges of an ever-changing world.

To ensure that all levels work together to support and drive the institutional mission we must ask:

1.      What competencies should students have when they complete a degree?

2.      How can students demonstrate that they have achieved the competencies at the desired level of performance?

If these two questions are asked at each level and asked with increasing vigor at the program and course levels, course performance outcomes will become an integral part of the entire assessment process. Before concentrating on the course level, it is important to revisit the mission, goals and outcomes at the program, college and institutional levels and make sure these questions are answered.

For the purpose of this paper, the following program mission statement, program goals, and course content goals have been developed. These are intended to serve as a generic example to provide the explanation for the Comprehensive Program Planning and Assessment Process Model (Figure 2), and the Flow Chart for Developing Course Performance Outcomes (Figure 3).

An example of a program mission statement is:

The Construction Management program's mission is to prepare graduates to assume responsible management    positions in the construction industry.

Examples of program goals are:

1.      Provide a comprehensive construction management curriculum blending the fundamentals of construction management, business management, and engineering.

2.      Provide graduates' opportunities for growth and development in their personal, professional and public life.

3.      Provide graduates' opportunities to develop and enhance communication and interactive skills.

4.      Provide a curriculum that includes comprehensive general education to develop a well-rounded individual with insight into social and human issues.

Prior to developing course goals and performance outcomes, programs must identify and validate content (Figure 3 -Steps I & 2). Active involvement of advisory committees, business and industry, graduates and students "I ensure program content is current and pertinent to the needs of the industry. Course content is identified and communicated as content goal statements. Daniel E. Volgler (199 1) states in his book Performance Instruction: Planning, Delivering and Evaluating that; Content goals are a simple and effective means to communicate curricular intent and specific curricular content (p.3). The content goal should be focused toward the learner and allows the learner to have a clear picture of the knowledge, skills and attitudes required to exit the learning experience. Vogler's Curriculum Pedagogy-Assessment model explained in his book, facilitates instructional decisions while maintaining great flexibility. The roots of this model can be traced to Bloom's well-known Taxonomy of Educational Objectives that categorize learning activities into learning domains and performance levels.

Once the program content is identified, it can be assigned to the appropriate courses (Figure 3 - Step 3). This process enables faculty to look across the curriculum to identify overlaps, to spot voids in the content, to sequence the courses, and to sequence the content within each course. Once the content goals have been assigned to a course, the content goal statements can be written (Figure 3 - Step 4). According to Vogler, the key factors to consider when writing content goals are:

1.      Write content goals as action statements in the present tense.

2.      Choose a verb for the action statement, which donate an action, which can be measured.

3.      Limit one verb per content goal statement.

4.      Focus on the performance you will require from students in order to demonstrate a specified level of   competency for a given content area.

5.      Orient the action verb to the domain and level where you want the learner to exit the learning experience. It is assumed to exit at a higher level in a domain the learner must also be able to perform at the lower levels in that domain.

6.      Develop a goal to communicate a learner product not an instruction method.

7.      Group content goals into units so that broad performance objectives may be developed for the course rather than detailed. Details or sub-performance objectives are developed in the lesson plan.

Examples of content goal statements for a typical construction course, CNIE 315 Specifications and Contracts are:

1. Explain construction-contracting methods

2. Analyze agency relationships

3. Differentiate organization types

4. Examine contract disputes and torts

5. Explain construction-bonding process

6. Interpret construction contract documents

7. Analyze construction specification components and organization
8. Analyze technical section components and organization

9. Analyze contract conditions

10. Prepare construction specifications

11. Explain construction insurance

12. Interpret subcontracts

13. Analyze contract relationships

14. Explain dispute resolution processes

15. Recognize ethical construction issues

The program mission, program goals and the content goals identified for CUE 3 15 Specification and Contracts provide the foundation for the development of the course goals (Figure 3 - Step 5). The question is what should students be able to do upon completion of the course? In this example, the student should be able to have a fundamental knowledge of construction contracts and enough knowledge and skills to write a construction specification. Each course goal should address these issues. Examples of course goals are:

1.      Provide students with a fundamental knowledge of construction contracts and their associated liabilities and incentives.

2.      Provide students with knowledge and skills to interpret and write construction specifications.

After the course goals are written, course performance outcomes can be developed to reflect what students must do to demonstrate their competencies for the specified content goals. Since content goals are written as simple action statements they are easily converted to student performance outcomes (Figure 3 - Step 6). Course content goals will cluster into units of instruction. Performance outcomes are developed by units or clusters of content goals. The simple, yet crucial question is: what should students be able to do at the completion of this course to demonstrate their skills and knowledge? Examples of performance outcomes are:

1.      The student will identify the components of the contract, interpret the requirements, and explain the

2.      project manager's role in the administration of the contract.

3.      The student will identify the stakeholders and analyze the contractual relationships.

4.      The student will explain the organization of the specification and compare and contrast performance and descriptive specifications.

5.      The student will prepare a performance and descriptive specification.

6.      The student will be able to identify ethical construction issues and discuss attitudes and values related to the ethical issues.

Once the student's performance outcomes have been identified, assessment measures can be developed (Figure 3 Step 7). Assessment measures must evaluate the action specified in the content goals and performance outcomes to effectively assess student achievement. Examples of assessment measures at the course level are:

1.      The students will be provided a set of contract documents. They will answer questions about the documents list the contract requirements write a paper to discuss the project manager's role in the administration of the contract.

2.      The student will write and prepare both a performance and descriptive specification based on a set of criteria.

3.      The student will identify a construction ethics issue and write a paper to discuss the attitudes and issues involved.

4.      The student will complete short answer and essay questions to identify the contractual issues involved, relationships of the contracting parties, and discuss possible solutions to resolve the dispute presented in a case study.

These four assessment measures tie directly to the five course performance outcomes and the two course goals previously identified. The assessment measures and course goals resulted from the content goals developed for the Construction Specifications and Contracts course. Construction specifications and contracts are an intricate part of construction management fundamentals identified in Program Goal 1. Performance outcomes, requiring students to think, organize and write in response to a given assignment, supports the general education components in Program Goals 3 and 4. Performance outcomes, dealing with construction ethics, attitudes and values, support: the growth and development of the individual identified in Program Goal 2. These in turn support the program mission statement that stresses that graduates must be prepared to assume responsible positions in the construction industry. At each stage of the process, student expectations have been addressed and specified. This process keeps the focus on the mission, goals and performance outcomes of the program, college, and institution.

The final step in the process for developing course performance outcomes is evaluation (Figure 3 - Step 8). The evaluation process insures that course content and student competencies are appropriate and at the same time continue to support the mission and goals of the institution, college and program while meeting the needs of the industry.

Summary

Expanding the program planning and assessment process to include course goals and performance outcomes evolved while addressing the requirements in the ACCE accreditation self study. This report requires that the syllabus state the course objectives in relation to the program goals and objectives. The requirement on the surface appears to be simple but becomes more complex as one tries to specifically tic the course content to specific goals of the program, college, and institution.

The Planning and Assessment Model (Figure 2) develops a complete planning and assessment process that transcends assessment beyond the program level to the specific course and student performance outcomes. The model provides a mechanism for faculty and programs to evaluate individual course content as well as content across the curriculum in relation to the needs of the construction industry. In addition, this process becomes a tool for improving teaching and learning. Faculty must answer whether or not the content identified does in fact help the student achieve competencies identified by the program and the industry. Focusing teaching and learning in this way eliminates nonessential material and helps facilitate the learning experience. Students benefit from this process because the intent of the content and requirements for satisfactory performance arc clearly specified. Performance outcomes with assessment measures identified for each course is the foundation necessary to develop and implement a comprehensive assessment plan for the institution.

Reference

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D. & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes, performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria, VA.

Shahbodaghlou, F & Rebholz, F.E. (1994). Outcome assessment model for a construction program. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference Associated Schools of Construction (pp. 87-97) Bradley University. Peoria, Illinois.

Slobojan, J. (1992). Implementing outcome assessment for program accreditation. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference Associated Schools of Construction (pp. 29-3 3) Auburn University. Auburn, Alabama.

Vogler, D.E. (1991). Performance instruction: planning, delivering, evaluating. Instructional Performance Systems, Inc. Eden Prairie, MN.

Yoakum, B. (1994). Program assessment good management practice. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference Associated Schools of Construction (pp. 191-200) Bradley University. Peoria, Illinois.

Go to the  Home page for:

Associated Schools of Construction Proceedings of the Annual Conference.  Copyright 2003
For problems or questions regarding this web contact Tulio Sulbaran, Proceedings Editor/Publisher.
Last updated: September 09, 2004.