Curricula Assessment Using the Course Diagnostic Survey: A Proposal

Abstract

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper was to develop a model of an alternative approach to assessing courses and ultimately curricula. Borrowing from Job Characteristics Theory, a modified survey, the Course Diagnostics Survey (CDS) was developed. Using this instrument, a model is suggested that measures the attitudes and resulting outcomes at both the course and overall program level. This model suggests a roadmap as to course or program components that directly impact desired outcomes. Hypotheses are suggested to study the potential of the CDS as an appropriate tool for assessment. INTRODUCTION Assessment of student learning has moved to the forefront of business schools over the last decade (Palomba & Banta, 1999, 2001; Banta, Lund, Black & Oblander, 1996). Much of this new emphasis is directly attributable to AACSB International expectations. In fact, many perceive this emphasis to increase with the new standards recently adopted that focus on assurance of learning (Black & Duhon, 2003; Mirchandani, Lynch & Hamilton, 2001; Michlitsch & Sidle, 2002). Most schools seeking to assess student learning fall back on administering standardized tests, imbedding measurements within courses or conducting post surveys. An almost universal approach has been to survey students with either the periodic student evaluations administered each semester or an instrument that is locally prepared that asks a series of questions to provoke attitudinal responses. Many of these instruments lack a high level of internal validity. The purpose of this research is to suggest a model using a modification of an instrument that has already proven to be valid and reliable at measuring motivational aspects of a job. The instrument to be recommended, the Course Diagnostic Survey (CDS), is adapted from the Job Diagnostic Survey. This instrument addresses what many, such as Charles Duke (2002), see as being as important as actual content absorption-student perceptions. As will be presented in subsequent sections of this paper, the CDS focuses on how the course design creates unique psychological states (student feeling toward their educational environment) and thus creates affective outcomes (satisfaction or lack there of). BACKGROUND No longer content with just technical competence from our business school graduates, employers are now demanding ...skills in leadership, problem solving, oral and written communication, along with attributes of motivation and assertiveness (Fontenot, Haarhues & Huffman, 1991, p. 56). However, the ability of our institutions of higher education to meet these changing demands has been severely questioned. Harvard President Emeritus, Derek Bok (1992) has chided our universities for their failure to even examine the effectiveness of their educational programs. Fortunately, one stream of research has begun to investigate the effectiveness of selected programs using cognitive scales for this purpose in business curriculums. Using their Skills/Career Usefulness scale, Fontenot, et al. ( 1991 ) studied the effectiveness of Small Business Institute (SBI) courses and Business Policy courses in developing desired student skills. Using job analysis and design techniques developed for work environments, Watts and Jackson (1995) investigated the applicability of Hackman and Oldham's (1976) Job Characteristic Theory to course design. Job Characteristic Theory has also been used to assess an institution's student evaluation of instruction (Watts, 1992), and to analyze the effect of course redesign on SBI student outcomes (Watts, Jackson & Box, 1995). The JDS proposes that positive results will result in the work place (high motivation, high satisfaction with the job and high performance level) when three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness of the job, experienced responsibility for the outcomes of the job, and knowledge of the job results) exist. …