Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

Cole TeamJune 10, 2009

Secondary Research Summary

Client Research

*Answers the question, “For whom is the program being prepared?”

The Client is the Center for Teaching and Learning, from this point on simply referred to as CTL, and Brock S. Allen, Director, SDSUCenter for Teaching & Learning and Professor of Educational Technology, and Kathy Williams, Associate Professor, Department of Biology, lead the CTL. The CTL was introduced to San Diego State University 10 years ago, the program falls under the Departmentof Undergraduate Studies SDSU, and some of its responsibilities include: carrying out the recommendations of the University Senateas proposed by the General Education Program Committee and its subcommittee, the General Education Essential CapacitiesSubcommittee, and the Student Learning Outcome Committee (Williams & Allen, 2009). “The CTL creates programs and services toenhance department, faculty, and lecturer awareness and development” (Center for Teaching and Learning, SDSU). The CTL alsoserves as a campus clearinghouse for information about teaching and learning resources and represents SDSU on the California StateUniversity Faculty Development Council (Center for Teaching and Learning, SDSU).

Problem Research

*Answers the question, “What is the problem that accounts for the programat this time?”

In 2006 the Western Association of Schools and Colleges Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities, from this point on simply referred to as WASC, completed its accreditation review of SDSU and made several recommendations to theUniversity for improvement. In particular it was recommended that SDSU give emphasis to General Education reform. In an actionletter from WASC, SDSU was charged with “identifying an achievable set of outcomes for their General Education program thatrepresent those competencies, skills, and qualities desired of a college-educated person of the 21

”

(Preparatory Review Report).As a result of WASC’s recommendation, in 2008 the Academic Senate approved new statements of what is expected that students willlearn in the General Education Courses. These new capacities are called the seven essential capabilities. These capabilities wereadded to the 2008 faculty curriculum guide along with scheduled implementation and oversight, and they were added to SDSU’s2008/2009 General Catalog. Furthermore, in spring 2009, CTL launched a lunch series entitled “Architecture of the Curriculum” tocontinue to bring about awareness of the changes to the General Education program.

Cole TeamJune 10, 2009

Secondary Research Summary

The core of the campaign is that most students don’t know about the changes to the General Education program, most faculty don’tknow about them, and most parents don’t know about them. Of the faculty that are aware, most don’t know exactly how they aregoing to incorporate the seven essentials into their courses. The minimum requirement is that they have focus on at least three of thesecapabilities in any General Education program. The expectations need to made explicit to faculty, who are developing and teaching thecourses, to students, so that they aren’t in quite so much of a fog as to what they are supposed to be learning, and to parents, so theyknow what their child should get out of their coursework.

Public Research

*Answers the question, “What audiences should be targeted for communication?”

The three publics that are most involved, most influential, and most likely to be affected by the changes to the general educationrequirements are faculty and lecturers who teach General Education courses, students enrolling in General Education courses, and parents of those students (Williams & Allen, 2009). The public that is of most concern to the CTL is the faculty and lecturers whoteach General Education at SDSU because they have the largest degree of influence in this matter and their collaboration is essential tothe programs success.

Media Research

*Answers the question, “What are the trends in the message content?”

After researching through the Lexis/Nexis Academic Database, it was remarkable to see the shift in prioritization of undergraduatelearning outcomes, not just at San Diego State, but also at other universities within the UC and CSU systems. For example, UC SantaCruz just amended their undergraduate program. Their linguistics professor, Jaye Padgett, described the change as, “We're taking anintellectual stand and giving our students the skills necessary for today's world” (University of California, 2009). At Washington StateUniversity, they are undergoing similar reform. Carol Ivory, chair of fine arts at WSU, says, "The committee will have the opportunityto re-envision the ideal WSU graduate and how the university prepares our graduates to take their place in the world,” she continues,“Students in general education engage with broad fields of inquiry and develop essential skills - such as communication and criticalthinking - over the course of their degrees” (University of California, 2009). These are some examples of other universities that aredetermined to implement a new method to undergraduate learning.