Curriculum • Program Evaluation

An evaluation plan is vital to understanding the productivity of any curriculum offering and knowing when and what to update. This is especially true for a new offering where students, faculty, and administrators will want to see evidence that outcome competencies, student satisfaction, and academic goals are being met. For assistance in the development of our evaluation plan at the University of Michigan, we sought the expertise of our university teaching resource center, The Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) from 1996-1998. We encourage other institutions considering new curricular offerings to identify educational resources in your academic institution or school of education, as they are a valuable resource.

Our evaluation strategy included the following elements:

Course Evaluation

Evaluation of the two new courses included the following four simple and brief components. Three of the four were conducted by the course instructor(s) and one was conducted by a CRLT evaluation consultant.

1. Pre/Post Assessment
   Either multiple choice knowledge-base items or essay-type pre and post assessments were given to students at the beginning and end of the new courses. These were answered anonymously and evaluation of the results allowed us to assess the effectiveness of our teaching of specific topic areas and helped us plan improvements for the next course offering.
   
   
2. Five-point survey
   Early in the course (within 3-4 weeks) a short survey was given to students. The results of the survey supplied the instructor(s) with timely feedback in five areas of course content and pacing: satisfaction with the textbook, use of class time, assignments, quizzes, and the general pace of the class. This information allowed the instructor(s) to make alterations early in the semester resulting in improved student learning.
   
   
3. Midsemester consultant-led evaluation session
   The CRLT consultant visited each course for one class period, evaluating teaching style, student/instructor interaction, and classroom environment. During the last twenty minutes of class, with the instructor(s) not present, the consultant engaged the students in an iterative process that helped identify strengths and deficiencies in the course. The consultant then met with the instructor(s) to review student feedback, underscoring course strengths and discussing strategies for addressing and correcting any identified deficiencies.
   
   
4. End of semester evaluation
   At the end of the semester, students complete a university-wide Likert scale course evaluation that includes a number of standard questions and course-specific items selected by each instructor. A summary table of anonymous results was provided to each instructor.

Curriculum Evaluation

Because the public health genetics curriculum design selected at the University of Michigan involved more than a single course, it was important to evaluate the total educational experience, in addition to the individual courses. As each cohort of students completed the two year curriculum sequence, a series of evaluations were administered. The elements of the curriculum evaluation plan included:

1. Mid-sequence focus group
   At the conclusion of the first year, Cohort I students met with one of the public health genetics curriculum faculty as a focus group discussing (1) what had influenced their decision to enroll in the program, (2) their perceptions of the curriculum so far and, looking forward, (3) what kinds of activities and interactions would they like to see happen the following year. This provided valuable feedback and direction which was shared with the Curriculum Committee.
   
   
2. Student satisfaction survey
   This written survey was given to Cohort I students at the end of year 2 during their last month in the program. The survey included Likert scale items and essay questions asking for feedback on:
   • Marketing and recruitment
     Students were asked about what had attracted them to the curriculum, the importance of a curriculum-specific brochure, and how the program could be better marketed in the future.
   • Curriculum
     Students were asked to self-assess the level of difficulty of each course in the curriculum, the adequacy of their academic preparation (prerequisites) for these components, and whether each course prepared them for each subsequent course.
   • Extra-curricular activities:
     Students were surveyed about the elements of their experiences which were not curriculum-specific, but program related, such as the student-initiated public health genetics student organization, the role of brown-bag discussion sessions, guest lecturers, and opportunities to interact with curriculum faculty members outside of the classroom.
   • Future goals
     Students were asked about the impact the curriculum experience had on their future employment or educational goals.
     
     
3. Focus group
   The Curriculum Committee reviewed the results from the above survey and identified certain topics that needed more clarification and student input. This resulted in Cohort I students being subsequently invited to participate in a focus group, led by a consultant from CRLT, to discuss these topics in detail.
   
   
4. Exit interview
   As the Cohort I students completed the program sequence, each student scheduled an exit interview with a member of the curriculum faculty. The purpose of this exit interview was to obtain the student's overall perspective on his/her public health genetics academic experience, to ask students if and how this information was applied in their other classes and to discuss whether there was a public health genetics component in their future plans. Summaries of each student interview (without student identifiers) were compiled and reviewed by the Curriculum Committee.

Comment
The students were excited to be a part of this new program and energetically participated in all evaluation components. They felt very much like a "steering committee" because they saw the value and impact of their comments and suggestions on the development, revisions and direction of the program.

TOP

Introduction | Self-Study Guide | Curriculum | Student Testimonials | Links

Home | UM SPH

In you have any questions, please contact: geneticsed@umich.edu