ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Readiness for the Learning Improvement Process
2
Planning Assessment Tool Instructions
3
4
Before you begin to use this readiness tool, review how the Learning Improvement Community defines a learning improvement project at https://www.learning-improvement.org/tenets-of-learning-improvement.
5
6
Purpose
7
The Readiness for the Learning Improvement Process Tool is intended to help faculty, academic administrators, and/or staff who support faculty (e.g., educational developers, assessment professionals) determine whether a department or program has the resources, attributes, and motivation needed to undertake a program-level learning improvement. The tool helps faculty and staff understand program readiness to engage in what could be a one to two-year, multi-stage process. There are no right or wrong answers to the items presented in the tool. The tool is formative in nature and is intended to help facilitate useful conversations among those interested in conducting a program-level learning improvement. The focus of this tool is the program, not an individual course or instructor.
8
9
Who should complete this tool?
10
The tool (available at the "Tool" tab/sheet below) may be completed by an individual or a working group. An individual faculty member may use it to better understand what goes into a learning improvement project and to evaluate the department's capacity before discussing a learning improvement project with colleagues. An administrator, faculty/educational developer, or other faculty/staff member with responsibility for promoting educational quality might also use the tool to help facilitate conversations about program-level learning improvement with a particular department or program. Having others in the department/program complete the tool as well -- either individually or as a group -- will provide a stronger foundation on which to build a learning improvement project.
11
12
An external facilitator is recommended if the tool is completed by a group. The role of the facilitator is to guide the discussion about the tool and what it reveals, to ask questions, and to provide insight related to learning improvement. This allows everyone in the department/program to participate fully in the conversation. The facilitator can compile all of the responses (redacting names) and complete a draft of the Summary section to identify strengths and possible challenges within each section and each readiness factor.
13
14
How should the tool be completed?
15
The tool can be used in two ways: (1) as a self-assessment for a department or program, or (2) as a way for an administrator or academic support person who focuses on student learning outcomes and/or program effectiveness (e.g., educational developer, assessment professional) to identify departments or programs that might be good candidates to conduct a learning improvement project.
16
17
The tool consists of 31 items grouped into three sections (Capacity, Culture, and Commitment). Each item is also associated with a readiness factor. For each item, indicate a rating (i.e. strongly agree, partially agree, disagree, and not sure) that most closely reflects your evaluation. Use the Notes/Rationale field to capture the complexities of the program's circumstances, to explain your rating, and/or to note questions or other information you would need in order to rate the item more accurately.
18
19
If the tool is being used by a group, you may opt to determine collectively the appropriate rating for each item, or your members may complete the tool individually and then compare their responses with others in the group to arrive at a rating. Use the Notes/Rationale field to explain the basis of the group's rating.
20
21
It is not necessary to have top ratings on every item in order to proceed successfully with a learning improvement project. This tool is meant to help inform discussions about readiness by illuminating a program's potential assets and obstacles.
22
23
Once you answer all questions related to capacity, culture, commitment, you might want to go back to the beginning and review your responses. We have found that users gain additional insight as they proceed through the tool; your responses to commitment might alter your earlier responses to culture, for example.
24
25
What happens after the tool is completed?
26
If working as an individual or group:
27
Once the individual or group has rated each item, use the Summary section at the end of the tool to identify strengths and possible challenges within each section and each readiness factor. Consider potential strategies and action steps that might be needed to address the challenge areas. This is the point at which the individual or group can discern whether or not to move forward.
28
29
If working with a facilitator:
30
After the faciltator compiles the data and completes the Summary based on all of the input, participants should review the compiled ratings and the draft summary. At this time, they can consider potential strategies and action steps needed to address the challenge areas.
31
32
If you decide to move ahead, visit the Learning Improvement Flowchart for an overview of the process. https://www.learning-improvement.org/_files/ugd/2b61ca_39bd014b26674e8e969ec7ed1258b353.pdf
33
34
Finally, let us know what you think! Please send feedback about the tool to hello@learning-improvement.org
35
36
Tips
37
Review what a learning improvement project is before discussing the responses to the tool.
38
39
Remember that the focus of this tool is the department/program, not an individual course or instructor. Examples of a "program" include an engineering program’s mandatory three-course sequence, a BA degree program in History, or an institution’s general education curriculum.
40
41
To ensure the success of the learning improvement project, more than one person needs to complete the tool early in the process. A diversity of perspectives – including disciplinary expertise, socio-cultural insights, and teaching experiences – enhances the possibility of creating change that benefits all students, faculty, and staff.
42
43
Honesty in completing the tool is essential. This tool is designed for you, your department/program, or the department(s)/program(s) you support. No one will benefit by presenting an overly positive (or negative) picture of the group's readiness.
44
45
Any program-level work is a politically, culturally, and socially situated process. Faculty and staff identities related to rank, socio-cultural positionalities, and sense of self affect individual participation, efficacy, and program power dynamics. All users need to consider how these factors affect participation in the process. Facilitators need to honor confidentiality and plan for power dynamics (implicit and explicit) particularly when the whole faculty/staff is completing and discussing the tool.
46
47
For inspiration and examples, take a look at learning improvement success stories from other higher education institutions: https://www.learning-improvement.org/read-stories
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100