USE OF DATA FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

1
USE OF DATA FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING AND CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT University of Pretoria 16-18
February 2005
2
KEY AREAS OF PROGRAM EVALUATION
9. Resources.
2. Student Motivation and Selection
Institutional Mission Program Goals
8. Student Placement.
3. Curriculum
1. Program Objectives and Outcomes
7. Faculty Development
3. Teaching and Learning
6. Student Satisfaction
4. Learning Environment
5. Student Learning Assessment.

3
KEY QUESTIONS
4
METHODS TO GATHER EVIDENCE
Program Entry
Continuous Improvement
Program Exit
Program Plan and Design
Validation With Key Stakeholders
Diagnostic Tests
Senior Exit Interviews
Course Evaluations

Institutional Self-Studies
Admission Reports
Senior Surveys
Reflective Memos
Baseline Skill Assessment
Curriculum Mapping
Portfolio Assessment
Workspace Usage Reports
Baseline Interviews
Course- Embedded Assessment
Alumni Surveys
Resource Allocation Studies
Data-Based Program Improvement
5
PRESENTATIONS

• Using Entry and Exit Diagnostics and Alumni
  Surveys to Revise Curriculum
• Brian Surgenor, Queens University, Canada
• Strategic Planning in MIT Aero-Astro Programs
  Based on Program Evaluation Data
• Doris R. Brodeur, Massachusetts Institute of
  Technology, Cambridge

6
STRATEGIC PLANNING IN MIT AERO-ASTRO PROGRAMS
BASED ON PROGRAM EVALUATION DATA Doris R.
Brodeur University of Pretoria 16-18 February
2005
7
BACKGROUND

• Excerpts from strategic planning for FY 2006 in
  MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Salient features of transformation over last ten
  years
• Strategic Plan of 1998 as the guide
• Five major facilities for instruction added since
  2001
• Entire undergraduate program based on CDIO and
  assessed on a regular basis
• Aero-Astro programs highly ranked in MIT School
  of Engineering
• Aero-Astro programs ranked number one in the
  United States

8
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS

• Three main messages
• Rigorous process to develop formal requirements
  (The CDIO Syllabus)
• Continuous improvement processes based on
  data-driven assessments of faculty and student
  performance related to teaching and learning
• Undergraduate programs in particular are in a
  strong competitive position relative to MIT
  School of Engineering

9
KEY AREAS OF PROGRAM EVALUATION
9. Resources.
2. Student Motivation and Selection
Institutional Mission Program Goals
8. Student Placement.
3. Curriculum
1. Program Objectives and Outcomes
7. Faculty Development
3. Teaching and Learning
6. Student Satisfaction
4. Learning Environment
5. Student Learning Assessment.

10
KEY QUESTIONS
11
METHODS ALIGNED WITH QUESTIONS
12
METHODS ALIGNED WITH QUESTIONS
13
1. PROGRAM OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES
14
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES (cont.)
15
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES (cont.)
16
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES (cont.)
17
2. STUDENT INTEREST IN AERO-ASTRO

• From 1995 to 2004, the number of undergraduate
  Aero-Astro students rose from 106 to 192 (81
  increase)
• Most of the growth has occurred since the
  Strategic Plan of 1998 (and the introduction of
  CDIO)
• Growth has occurred even amidst a period of
  upheaval in aerospace industries
• Strong competitive position relative to other
  programs at MIT

18
STUDENT INTEREST IN AERO-ASTRO (cont.)
19
5. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
20
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT (cont.)
21
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT (cont.)
22
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT (cont.)
23
6. STUDENT SATISFACTION AT EXIT
24
6. STUDENT SATISFACTION W/ COURSES
25
8. PLANS AT EXIT FROM PROGRAMS
26
10. PLAN FOR CONTINUED EXCELLENCE

• Use continuous improvement processes and make
  revisions where indicated
• Seek out new resources to sustain educational
  reform initiatives
• Apply best practice and lessons learned to the
  improvement of Aero-Astro graduate programs

CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE