exemplaryprogram

or Improving General Education

AGLS Award for the Improvement of General Education:

Exemplary Program Award

In the fall of 2006, AGLS published Improving Learning in General Education: An AGLS Guide to Assessment and Program Review. The Guide’s systems analysis review questions make innovative use of continuous quality improvement principles and assume a “quality” general education program is built upon ongoing improvement efforts arising out of a commitment to and assessment of learning outcomes.
The goal of the AGLS Awards program is to serve two national general education needs, both related to the purpose of the Guide. Currently, little recognition is given to the creative program accomplishments produced by general education faculty and administrators committed to ongoing improvement. Also, a need exists for effective program improvement ideas and models, especially as institutions prepare for accreditation visits. AGLS hopes to address both needs through this award process.
Winning proposals are selected by a panel of nationally recognized general education leaders, accreditors, and AGLS Executive Council members. Winners will be asked to present a description of their effective processes at the AGLS annual fall conference. Awards will include a plaque recognizing recipients’ efforts, listing in the AGLS Newsletter, recognition on the AGLS website, and half‐priced conference registration and annual membership fee for the upcoming year.

2011 Association for General and Liberal Studies Exemplary Program Awards for Improving General Education—Effective Assessment Processes

It is a great pleasure to announce the recipients of the 2011 AGLS Exemplary Program Award for Improving General Education. George Mason University and Stetson University are to be congratulated for developing innovative, high-quality general and liberal education assessment plans. Recipients of the Awards are recognized during a special ceremony at the Annual Conference (in Miami for the 2011 Conference), where they have the opportunity to give a brief overview of their Award-winning methods. For 2011, the winners will also present a detailed description of their processes during the concurrent sessions.

The AGLS Awards recognize general and liberal education program improvement efforts made by institutions employing the principles found in the AGLS publication, Improving Learning in General Education: An AGLS Guide to Assessment and Program Review. The application narratives describing the winning improvement processes, along with the narratives of previous winners, are accessible through the AGLS website (agls.org).

Judges’ Comments about the Award Winning Applications

George Mason University:

The Awards Committee agreed that George Mason’s assessment process will serve as an excellent model for other institutions. The judges were particularly impressed with George Mason’s focus on synthesis, which one judge noted as a “tricky topic,” but one for which models are needed. The Committee agreed that the use of faculty course portfolios is an innovative approach to assessment that engages the administration and large numbers of faculty in the process. This exemplary model also addresses well the issue of using assessment to drive improvement decisions; judges agreed the process has great potential to improve both the institution and student learning. The Committee thought George Mason’s methods could easily be replicated and offer great benefits as a model for other institutions.

Stetson University:

The Awards Committee again agreed that Stetson’s assessment process will serve as an excellent model. The judges were particularly impressed with Stetson’s multi-point assessment process, assessing writing progress during the first and the last years of the students’ education. Several judges noted the wise use of both holistic and analytic rubrics in order to identify specific improvement needs. The Committee saw merit in the faculty’s thoughtfulness in recalibrating its standards and rubrics as the assessment process evolved. Committee members also appreciated the dynamic qualities of the work as the faculty collaborated and worked across the curriculum to improve learning, and the Committee praised Stetson’s treatment of writing instruction and assessment as a campus-wide responsibility.