Evidence for effective practice awards
Supporting documentation—evidence—is one of 5 values by which awards are selected:
Innovation: The practice is inventive or original
Replicability: The practice can be implemented in a variety of learning environments
Potential impact: The practice would advance the field if many adopted it
Scope: The practice explains its relationship with other quality elements
Supporting documentation: The practice is supported with evidence of effectiveness
The rubric evaluates evidence with this scale:
|
NA
|
Poor
|
Average
|
Good
|
Excellent
|
|
No evidence provided
|
Little or inadequate evidence provided
|
Anecdotal or another single data source
|
Research or empirical data from multiple sources
|
Empirical data from multiple sources over a significant time period (1-2 yrs. or more)
|
Awardee examples of effective documentation
- Access: Using the "HyFlex" Course and Design Process (San Francisco State University) Evidence: Student surveys, attendance patterns and learning outcomes
- Learning effectiveness: Using the Community of Inquiry Framework Survey for Multi-Level Institutional Evaluation and Continuous Quality Improvement (American Public University System) Evidence: Student survey data and student retention records
- Faculty Satisfaction: ELATEwiki: E-Learning and Teaching Exchange Wiki to Support Faculty Development (Kansas State University) Evidence: Growth in wiki participation
- Student satisfaction: Wizards: Student Tutors Help Peers Learn (Mercy College) Evidence: Student and professor surveys; 50% reduced failure rate
- Scale: The Statistical Buffet (Ohio State University) Evidence: Equal or greater success on common exams in comparison to students in traditional course sections; reduction in withdrawals; cost savings of about $127,000 per year, or $48/student
These guiding Sloan-C documents provide additional examples of evidence metrics
The Quality Framework
The Pillar Guide
