1887
Volume 2014, Issue 1
  • E-ISSN: 1703-1958

Abstract

This study reports on the development and implementation of the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment process and the system implemented at Qatar University. This system consists of two phases, and , with progressive and continuous improvement in the assessment efforts. The initial 2006–2011 findings suggest effective strategies that can be used to build and develop assessment culture and knowledge. This study is significant because it provides ways that other universities in the region can be engaged in building their quality assurance system and continuously improving student learning outcomes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2014.3
2014-04-01
2019-12-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/nmejre/2014/1/nmejre.2014.3.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2014.3&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Harden RM, Crosby JR, Davis MH. An introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teacher. 1999; 21:1:714.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ewell PT. An emerging scholarship: a brief history of assessment. In Banta TW et al. Building Scholarship of Assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Spady WG. Outcome-based Education. ACSA report no 5. Belconnen: Australian Curriculum Studies Association 1993.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ruhland SK, Brewer JA. Implementing an assessment plan to document student learning in a two-year technical college. J Voc Educ Res. 2001; 26::141171.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Banta TW, et al., Building a Scholarship of Assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Barr RB, Tagg J. From teaching to learning: a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change. 1995; 27:6:1325.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Froyd J, Simpson N. Student-centered Learning: Addressing Faculty Question about Student-Centered Learning. Presented at the Course, Curriculum, Labor, and Improvement Conference, Washington, DC, 2008;. Retrieved from http://ccliconference.org/files/2010/03/Froyd_Stu-CenteredLearning.pdf .
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Knight P, Trowler P. Departmental Leadership for Higher Education: New Directions for Communities of Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press/SRHE 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Maclellan E, Soden R. The significance of knowledge in learning: a psychologically informed analysis of higher education students' perceptions. IJSoTL. 2007; 1:1:118.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Suskie L. Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Anderson LW. Curricular alignment: a re-examination. Theor Pract. 2002; 41:4:255260.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Biggs J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High Educ. 1996; 32::247364.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Biggs J. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. High Educ Res Dev. 1999; 18:1:5775.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Biggs J. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. High Educ Res Dev. 2012; 31:1:3955.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cohen SA. Instructional alignment: searching for a magic bullet. Educ Res. 1987; 16::1620.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Devlin M, Samarawickrema G. The criteria of effective teaching in a changing higher education context. High Educ Res Dev. 2010; 29:2:111124.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kember D, McNaught C. Enhancing University Teaching: Lessons from Research into Award-winning Teachers. Abingdon: Oxon 2007;. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. McGehee JJ, Griffith LK. Large-scale assessments combined with curriculum alignment: agents of change. Theor Pract. 2001; 40:2:137144.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Squires D. Curriculum alignment research suggests that alignment can improve student achievement. VTCH. 2012; 85:4:113129.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Zakaria FS, Awaisu A. Instructional design and assessment shared-learning experience during a clinical pharmacy practice experience. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011; 75:4:16.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ekman R, Pelletier S. Assessing student learning: a work in progress. Change. 2008; 40:4:1419.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Leveille DE. An Emerging view on Accountability in American Higher Education. Berkely: University of California at Berkely. Center for Studies in Higher Education 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Peterson M, Einarson MK. What are colleges doing about student assessment? Does it make a difference? J High Educ. 2001; 72:6:629669.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pike GR. Assessment measures; Making accountability transparent: next steps for the voluntary system of accountability. Assessment Update. 2008; 20:2:89, 12.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kuh GD. Risky business: promises and pitfalls of institutional transparency. Change. 2007; 39:1:3135.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Shulman LS. ounting and recounting: assessment and the quest for accountability. Change. 2007; 39:1:2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. United Nations Development Programme/Regional Bureau for Arab States (UNDP/RBAS). Quality Assessment of Education Programmes in Arab Universities Regional Overview Report. New York 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Al Attiyah A, Khalifa B. Small steps lead to quality assurance and enhancement in Qatar University. Qual High Educ. 2009; 15:1:3334.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. In: Bloom BS, ed. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals – Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay 1956.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. In: Anderson LWKrathwohl DRAirasian PWCruikshank KAMayer REPaul RPintrich RPRaths JWittrock MC, eds. A Taxonomy for Learning Teaching and Assessing—A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Complete edition. New York: Longman, 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Munzenmaier C, Rubin N. Perspectives Bloom's Taxonomy: What's Old is New Again. Santa Rosa: The ELearning Guild 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Academic Evaluation Office. Final Review Report of Students Learning Outcomes. Qatar: Qatar University (Unpublished) 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Zu X, Fredendall LD, Douglas TJ. The evolving theory of quality management: the role of Six Sigma. J Oper Manage. 2008; 26:5:630650.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Harry MJ, Schroeder R. Six Sigma, The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing The World's Top Corporations. New York: Doubleday, Random House 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Pande PS, Neuman RP, Cavanagh RR. The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance. New York: McGraw-Hill 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Brady JE, Allen TT. Six Sigma literature: a review and agenda for future research. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2006; 22::335367.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Tjahjono B, Ball P. Six Sigma: a literature review. Int J Lean Six Sigma. 2010; 1:3:216233.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Aboelmaged MG. Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research. Int J Qual Reliab Manag. 2010; 27:3:268317.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Jung-Lang Cheng. Implementing Six Sigma via TQM improvement: an empirical study in Taiwan. TQM J. 2008; 20:3:182195.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Preeprem N, Hendry L. Exploring the six sigma phenomenon using multiple case study evidence. Int J Oper Prod Man. 2008; 28:3:279303.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Academic Program and Learning Outcomes assessment office. The General Learning Outcome Assessment Process Guidebook at Qatar University. Qatar: Qatar University 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. University-Wide Program learning Outcomes Assessment Committee. Assessment Report For Selected Academic Programs at Qatar University 2008-2009 Academic Year. Qatar: Qatar University, UWPLOA. (Unpublished) 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kezar A. Institutionalizing student outcomes assessment: the need for better research to inform practice. Innov High Educ. 2013; 38::189206.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Maher A. Learning outcomes in higher education: implications for curriculum design and student learning. JoHLSTE. 2004; 3:2:4654.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Magruder J, McManis M, Young C. The right idea and the right time: Development of a transformational assessment culture. In: Gray PJBanta TW, eds. The Campus-Level Impact of Assessment, Progress Problems and Possibilities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 1997;:1729.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Mentkowski M. Creating a context where institutional assessment yields educational improvement. J Gen Educ. 1991; 40::255283.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Rust C. The impact of assessment on student learning: how can the research literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment strategies and learner-centered assessment practices? Act Learn High Educ. 2002; 3::145158.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Volkwein JF, Lattuca LR, Harper BJ, Domingo RJ. Measuring the impact of professional accreditation on student experiences and learning outcomes. Res High Educ. 2007; 48:2:251282.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Banta TW, et al., Making a Difference: Outcomes of a Decade of Assessment in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 1993.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Banta TW, Lund JP, Black KE, Oblander FW. Assessment in Practice: Putting Principles to Work on College Campuses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 1996.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Bresciani MJ. Outcomes-Based Academic and Co-Curricular Program Review. Compilation of Institutional Good Practices. Sterling, VA: Stylus 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Bresciani MJ. Assessing Student learning in General Education: Good Practice case studies. Bolton, MA: Anker 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Kuh GD, Gonyea RM, Rodriguez D. The scholarly assessment of student development. In: Banta TW, ed. Building a Scholarship of Assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Webb NM, Shavelson RJ, Haertel EH. Reliability coefficients and generalizability theory. Handbook Statistics. 2006; 26::81124.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Wang Ping. The inter-rater reliability in scoring composition. English Lang Teach. 2009; 2:3:3943.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2014.3
Loading
/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2014.3
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): accountability , assessment , learning outcomes and quality assurance
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error