quality enhancement plan - lsu.edu · v. literature review and ... figure iv.b the integrated...

Quality Enhancement Plan

SACSCOC On-Site Review:

March 11-13, 2014

Developed by Louisiana State University and A & M Collegein preparation for reaffirmation of accreditation by the

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges

Louisiana State University Quality Enhancement Plan

March 2014

1

Foreword from President and Chancellor of Louisiana State University and A&M College The changing landscape of higher education provides a pivotal opportunity for flagship universities to renew their commitment to student learning. Our Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) will increase students’ opportunities to participate in undergraduate research in ways that significantly advance their knowledge, abilities, and capacity for lifelong learning. The plan transforms student learning by adapting courses and curricula in a manner that takes advantage of the wealth of research activities always in progress at LSU. Development of the high-level skills and abilities associated with effective research ensures their emergence from the baccalaureate experience well prepared for the challenges they will face in the 21st Century workforce. Participation in undergraduate research will deepen contact with faculty and reinforce the prospect that students will acquire the ability to expand knowledge, create innovations, and effectively communicate findings. This plan strongly affirms our commitment “to be a leading research-extensive university” that challenges students “to achieve the highest levels of intellectual and personal development.”

Many individuals worked tirelessly on this project. The university is indebted to the faculty, students, staff, and administrators who served on The SACSCOC Steering Committee and The QEP team, whose dedicated effort, thoughtful feedback, and creativity resulted in this impressive, promising plan. Thanks are due also for the contributions of numerous others from LSU colleges, departments, and administrative groups, and from private-sector partners. Finally, special recognition is due to the primary authors of this document: QEP team chair, Carol O’Neil; QEP implementation committee members Nancy Clark, Randy Duran, Jori Erdman, Sarah Ferstel, Bobby Matthews, Janet McDonald, Elaine Smyth, and Vince Wilson; and the staff of the Office of Communications & University Relations.

As one who greatly benefited from participation in undergraduate research, I am delighted to lead the LSU community in the launch of “LSU Discover.”

F. King AlexanderPresident and Chancellor

2

Louisiana State University QEP

Table of ContentsForeword and Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................... 1I. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 4II. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5 II.1 Introduction to the University ................................................................................................... 5

II.2 The LSU Faculty ...................................................................................................................... 6II.3 LSU Students .......................................................................................................................... 7

III. Institutional Process to Identify Key Issues and Select the QEP ........................................... 9III.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 9III.2 Assessing Existing Data and Data Collected by the QEP Team to Identify Opportunities to

Improve Student Learning ...................................................................................................... 9III.3 Conferences Attended and Acquisition of Information from External Sources ..................... 16III.4 Solicitation and Evaluation of Initial and Final Concept Papers ........................................... 16III.5 Further Assessment of the Final Two Concept Papers ........................................................ 16III.6 Existing Undergraduate Research Programs at LSU ........................................................... 17III.7 Focus Groups and Pilot Studies ........................................................................................... 18

IV. LSU Discover SLOs ................................................................................................................... 19IV.1 Definition of Undergraduate Research ................................................................................. 19IV.2 SLOs ..................................................................................................................................... 19IV.3 Primary Methodology for Assessing LSU Discover SLOs: The Digital Response Folio ....... 20IV.4 Learning E-Portfolio .............................................................................................................. 21IV.5 SLO5 and the Student’s Digital Self-Representation as Competent Researcher: The Digital

Self (exclusive to mentored students and select degree programs) ..................................... 21IV.6 Overview of QEP Program Activities .................................................................................... 22

V. Literature Review and Best Practices ..................................................................................... 23V.1 Review of Literature ............................................................................................................... 23V.2 Best Practices ........................................................................................................................ 25V.3 Best Practices at Other Institutions ....................................................................................... 26

VI. Actions To Be Implemented...................................................................................................... 27VI.1 Co-curricular Opportunities .................................................................................................. 27VI.2 Curricular Transformation ..................................................................................................... 32VI.3 Mentored Undergraduate Research ..................................................................................... 40VI.4 LSU Discover: Research Day .............................................................................................. 49

VII. Timeline: A logical calendar of actions to be implemented ................................................... 54VIII. Project Management ................................................................................................................. 59IX. Resources .................................................................................................................................. 63X. LSU Discover Assessment ....................................................................................................... 65XI. References ................................................................................................................................. 71Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 76

3

TABLESTable II.A LSU’s Vision and Mission Statements and Selected Flagship 2020 Goals ........................................................................ 6Table III.A Timeline of Selecting the QEP at LSU and Finalizing the Report .................................................................................... 10Table III.B Results from University Learning Competencies, 2012 ................................................................................................... 12Table III.C Comparison of LSU First-year and Senior Responses with Carnegie Class Peer Group Responses for Select

Questions Related to Undergraduate Research or Skills/Accomplishments for NSSE 2011 .......................................... 13Table III.D Results from Employer/Advisory Board Survey April, 2013 ............................................................................................. 14Table III.E Students’ Ranking of What They Think Is Most Important for Faculty to Improve ........................................................... 15Table III.F Conferences Attended and Information Gathering from External Sources ...................................................................... 16Table IV.A Overview of LSU Discover Activities ................................................................................................................................ 22Table V.A LSU Discover Activities Based on Best Practices of Other Institutional Programs ........................................................... 26Table VI.A.1 Introduction and Awareness Activities .......................................................................................................................... 29Table VI.A.2 Skill Set/Knowledge-base Building Activities ................................................................................................................ 30Table VI.A.3 Research Community Cultivation and Networking Activities ........................................................................................ 31Table VI.B.1 Examples of Revised Integrated Curriculum within a Field of Study ............................................................................ 34Table VI.B.2 Examples of Revised Research Methods Course ........................................................................................................ 35Table VI.B.3 Examples of Revised Content Course ......................................................................................................................... 36Table VI.B.4 Activities from ENVS 1127 Pilot .................................................................................................................................... 38Table VI.B.5 Activities from ARCH 4700 Pilot ................................................................................................................................... 39Table VI.C.1 SLOs, First Semester of Mentored Undergraduate Research ..................................................................................... 47Table VI.C.2 SLOs, Second, and Subsequent Semesters of Mentored Research ........................................................................... 47Table VI.C.3 SLOs, Terminal Semester of Mentored Undergraduate Research ............................................................................... 47Table VI.D Research Day Timeline ................................................................................................................................................... 53Table VII.A Timeline by Activities ...................................................................................................................................................... 55Table VII.B Timeline by SLO ............................................................................................................................................................. 56Table IX.A Budget ............................................................................................................................................................................. 64Table X.A General Schedule of Assessment and Related Artifacts .................................................................................................. 67Table X.B Student Achievement in SLOs Rubric .............................................................................................................................. 67Table X.C Overview of QEP Activities ............................................................................................................................................... 68Table X.D QEP Learning Outcomes & Related Interventions ........................................................................................................... 69Table X.E SLOs and Assessment ..................................................................................................................................................... 70

FIGURESFigure III.A Student Survey data ...................................................................................................................................................... 15Figure III.B Faculty Survey data ....................................................................................................................................................... 15Figure IV.A Examples of Three Customized College Logos ............................................................................................................. 19Figure IV.B The Integrated System of Digital Response Folios ........................................................................................................ 20Figure IV.C Example of TaskStream Primary DRF ........................................................................................................................... 21Figure VI.A Anticipated Number of Mentored Students in LSU Discover Per Year .......................................................................... 43Figure VI.B Majors Per Tenure-track Faculty Member by Selected LSU Academic Departments ................................................... 44Figure VIII.A LSU Discover Project Management ............................................................................................................................ 59Figure X.A Organization of LSU Discover Assessment .................................................................................................................... 65

APPENDICESAppendix A Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) Team ...................................................................................................................... 76Appendix B Original Two-to-three Page Concept Papers ................................................................................................................ 78Appendix C Rubric for Scoring Initial Concept Paper ...................................................................................................................... 79Appendix D Updating the University Community and Soliciting Feedback ...................................................................................... 80Appendix E LSU Discover Assessment Committee ......................................................................................................................... 82Appendix F LSU Discover/AACU Ethics Rubric ............................................................................................................................... 83Appendix G QEP Implementation Committee .................................................................................................................................. 84Appendix H Marketing Timeline ....................................................................................................................................................... 85Appendix I Council on Co-Curricular Activities ................................................................................................................................. 86Appendix J College Advisory Board ................................................................................................................................................. 87Appendix K Survey of Academic Department Chairs....................................................................................................................... 88Appendix L Research Day Poster Rubric ........................................................................................................................................ 89Appendix M Student Advisory Board................................................................................................................................................ 90Appendix N General Schedule of Assessment and Related Artifacts (SLOs 2-5; continued from Table X.A) ................................. 91Appendix O Student Achievement in SLOs Rubric (SLOs 2-5; continued from Table X.B) ............................................................. 92Appendix P SLOs and Assessment (Curricular Transformation, Mentored Research and Research Day; (continued from Table X.D) ........................................................................................................................................... 94

Table of Contents

4


I. Executive Summary Louisiana State University and A & M College (LSU) presents this plan for significantly improving student learning outcomes (SLOs) through strategic reorientations of teaching, mentoring, and curricula that take advantage of one of the signal strengths of the university: its extensive research mission. Through LSU’s implementation of this five-year Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP), students will develop understanding of research and its essential role in the improvement of life, have broader and earlier opportunities to become involved in undergraduate research, become involved in focused multiple-semester mentored research experiences, and learn to present new knowledge they have had a part in creating. The four integrated themes of co-curricular activities, curricular transformation, mentored research, and Research Day will improve undergraduate achievement through implementation of research experiences that constitute innovations in teaching and learning campus-wide. Grounding these educational interventions in five SLOs and associated valid assessment methods ensures that this effort will transform student learning in a direction commensurate with the institution’s compelling research mission.

Discovery and learning stand as two of the four goals of Flagship 2020, the strategic plan that corresponds to LSU’s status as the state’s flagship university. Together they indicate an integration of student learning and research that reinforces the institutional mission of producing engaged citizens and enlightened leaders at the highest levels of intellectual and personal development. The choice of undergraduate research was thus a crucial one that strongly reinforces the interrelation of these two goals.

TOPIC SELECTION AND SLOS The QEP team solicited proposals from stakeholders across the campus in a process that produced a total of 22 original concept papers. With input from the entire LSU community, including the Faculty and Staff Senates, Student Government, and the Dean’s Council, a deliberate multi-step process resulted in the selection of undergraduate research as the QEP for 2014-2019, with the program branded LSU Discover. A QEP implementation committee combined broad input from campus constituents with a careful review of extant literature to develop the four integrated themes. These themes comprise a multifaceted program for accentuating undergraduate research opportunities through implementation of specific heuristic innovations across the undergraduate experience. The educational interventions are grounded in five SLOs through which students will develop the ability to (1) identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information and/or literature sources associated with a research project; (2) utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem; (3) demonstrate awareness of the responsible conduct of research; (4) identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question; and (5) articulate research findings through written, visual, performance, or oral presentation.

ASSESSMENT An integrated system of student digital response folios (DRF) comprises the primary method for both formative and summative assessment of LSU Discover’s SLOs. Additionally, faculty will use a rubric-based method to evaluate participating students’ formal presentation of the results of their research during a public Research Day event on the LSU campus.

MANAGEMENT Housed in the LSU Office of Research and Economic Development (ORED), LSU Discover also reports to LSU’s Office of Academic Affairs. Several new professional positions will provide formal coordination for the endeavor. LSU Discover is also supported by four advisory committees that will institutionalize support and provide a two-way conduit for broad-based feedback.

5

II. IntroductionII.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE UNIVERSITYLouisiana State University and A & M College (LSU) is located in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, which has a population of nearly 450,000 or nearly 10% of the people living in the state.1 Located on more than 2,000 acres in the southern part of the city, the university is bordered on the west by the Mississippi River. The university has more than 250 principal buildings. Original campus architecture,with its tan stucco walls and red tile roofs characteristic of the Renaissance domestic style of northern Italy, features buildings housing classrooms and administrative offices grouped around a double quadrangle and connected by colonnaded passageways. Design of recent campus structures has succeeded in blending contemporary features with this older style of architecture.

LSU is recognized as the state’s premier research university by the Board of Regents’ Master Plan for Public Postsecondary Education.2 It is also one of only 73 public institutions classified by the Carnegie Foundation as a Research University–Very High Research Activity3 (unique in Louisiana); and it is a land- (1882 Morrill Land-Grant Act),4 sea- (1978),5 and space-6 (2005) grant institution. Recognized as the flagship university of the Louisiana State University System, LSU is the only comprehensive research institution in Louisiana.7

LSU serves the citizens of Louisiana by pursuing its goal of being recognized nationally as one of the leading public universities in the South and as one of the top public universities in the nation. LSU can also model the highest aspirations of higher education as a learner-centered, faculty-and-staff-supportive, research-intensive, diverse university, with a continuous commitment to public service. A primary institutional goal is to continue to lead public higher education in Louisiana in undergraduate education, graduate and professional education, research, service, and economic development. This multifaceted environment links teaching and learning to the research of the faculty in the ongoing effort of the institution to extend academic excellence across time.

6


LSU’s Vision, Mission Statement, Flagship 2020, and Strategic Plan: The vision and the mission of LSU7 support an integration of research and learning that covers the entire LSU community. This dynamic challenges not only the graduate program, traditionally linked to research and learning, but also the undergraduate program to increase research efforts. In 2003 LSU adopted the National Flagship Agenda, which recognized the university’s unique role, scope, and mission as the leading academic institution in the state. This agenda articulated goals for achieving regional and national recognition in a number of areas, including research and undergraduate and graduate instruction. The document inspired a commitment to excellence among the faculty and staff and generated within the state recognition of LSU’s importance as the state’s flagship campus. An extension of the initial National Flagship Agenda, Flagship 2020 focuses on the goals of learning, discovery, diversity, and engagement and additionally articulates an intentional integration of the first two goals—research and learning8 (Table II.A). For example, the performance indicators of Flagship 2020 include the number of undergraduate students that are involved in a research experience at LSU. Moreover, the institutional strategic plan, guided by Flagship 2020, focuses on how the university can improve its undergraduate research and educational enterprise to make it more nationally competitive.

Table II.A: LSU’s Vision and Mission Statements and Selected Flagship 2020 Goals*The vision of LSU is to be a leading research-extensive university, challenging undergraduate and graduate students to achieve the highest levels of intellectual and personal development.

The mission of LSU is the generation, preservation, dissemination, and application of knowledge and cultivation of the arts. In implementing its mission, LSU is committed to offer a broad array of undergraduate degree programs and extensive graduate research opportunities designed to attract and educate highly-qualified undergraduate and graduate students; employ faculty who are excellent teacher-scholars, nationally competitive in research and creative activities, and who contribute to a world-class knowledge base that is transferable to educational, professional, cultural, and economic enterprises; and use its extensive resources to solve economic, environmental, and social challenges.

Flagship 2020: First and Second Goals:Discovery: Expand discovery through transformative research and creative activities addressing contemporary and enduring issues that shape the way we live in the world.• Increase nationally-recognized research and creative activities. • Expand interdisciplinary solutions to significant social, environmental, economic, cultural, and educational problems. • Increase partnerships with industry to develop intellectual property and foster commercial applications.

Learning: Enhance a faculty-led and student-centered learning environment that develops engaged citizens and enlightened leaders.• Increase the number of students with strong skills in critical thinking, creative problem solving, and effective communication. • Produce greater numbers of students who become intellectual and civic leaders. • Broaden faculty, staff, and student engagement in a rich intellectual and creative campus culture.

* Flagship 2020 goals 1 and 2 relate directly to the QEP; there are a total of 4 goals.8

II.2 THE LSU FACULTY The university has 1,436 full-time and part-time faculty members—approximately 89% of whom have terminal degrees.9

LSU’s distinguished faculty includes members of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Mathematical Society Fellows, and Fellows of the American Chemical Society.10 Among the faculty are those who have won prestigious awards, including Fulbright Scholarships11,12 and national teaching awards.13,14

7

An important measure of any Research I institution is the amount and sources of sponsored research. LSU’s external sponsored programs funding during FY 2011/2012 was $142.8 million. (The LSU Medical Schools—located in New Orleans and Shreveport—LSU Health Sciences Center, the LSU Dental School, and the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge are separate campuses, so this figure does not include their sponsored programs funding). Funding for research also includes support from national sources, including the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Department of Homeland Security, and NASA. LSU is forging new frontiers in hurricane response and preparedness, bioscience, national security, technology, literature, coastal sciences, and genetics. At any given time, there are more than 2,000 sponsored research projects being conducted by the more than 6,000 faculty and graduate students at LSU.15

II.3 LSU STUDENTS Currently more than 27,000 students are enrolled in the university’s senior academic colleges and schools, graduate and professional schools, and the interdisciplinary Honors and University Colleges and Division of Continuing Education. LSU’s 10 senior academic divisions are the College of Agriculture, the College of Art & Design, the E.J. Ourso College of Business, the School of the Coast & Environment, the College of Engineering, the College of Human Sciences & Education, the College of Humanities & Social Sciences, the Manship School of Mass Communication, the College of Music & Dramatic Arts, and the College of Science. In addition, LSU has two graduate-level professional schools: the LSU Graduate School and the LSU School of Veterinary Medicine.16

At LSU, bachelor’s degrees are offered in 70 major fields; master’s degrees are offered in 76 major fields; and doctoral degrees are offered in 48 major fields. Since its first commencement in 1869, LSU has awarded more than 239,000 degrees. The university produces approximately 24% of Louisiana’s baccalaureate graduates, 22% of the master’s graduates, and 57% of the doctoral graduates. From summer 2012 to spring 2013, a total of 6,093 degrees were awarded. Of these degrees, 74% were baccalaureate degrees; 19% were master’s degrees; 0.16% were post-master’s certificates; 5% were doctoral degrees; and 1.3% were professional degrees.17

The university attracts approximately 13% of the state’s total enrollment in higher education, with LSU students coming from many racial/ethnic backgrounds. The student body consists of students from every parish (county) in Louisiana, all 50 states, and more than 100 foreign countries. The average age of undergraduates is 21 years; however, many older students also pursue degrees at LSU. The student body is approximately 52% female. The racial/ethnic breakdown is 3% Asian, 11% non-Hispanic black, 5% non-resident alien, 5% Hispanic, 0.3% American Indian or Alaskan Native, 0.09% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 73% non-Hispanic white, 2% two or more races, and 0.7% unknown.18

Chapter II Introduction

8


College of Engineering

College of Art & Design

9

III. Institutional Process for Identifying Key Issues and Selecting the QEP

III.1 OVERVIEW As part of the reaffirmation process, the QEP team (Appendix A), responsible for selection of the QEP, and the SACSCOC steering committee,19 responsible for developing the Compliance Certification, were appointed to obtain broad-based input from faculty, administrators, staff, and students. The QEP team chair serves on the steering committee as a liaison between both groups. During the selection process, several parallel tracks were undertaken by the QEP team (Table III.A): (1) assessing existing data and data collected by the QEP team to identify potential opportunities to improve student learning; (2) attending SACSCOC institutes/meetings and gathering data from external sources—including a consultant; (3) updating the university community on the reaccreditation process and soliciting feedback from broad-based constituencies; and (4) soliciting and evaluating concept papers from the university community for potential QEPs. After the potential topics indicated in the concept papers that were submitted to the QEP team were narrowed and evaluated by the team, the team re-assessed the potential topics in light of (1) the university’s mission and goals, (2) existing and collected data, and (3) how the topics would complement or extend existing programs at LSU.

III.2 ASSESSING EXISTING DATA AND DATA COLLECTED BY THE QEP TEAM TO IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING

III.2.1 University Learning Competencies LSU has six learning competencies that are addressed initially in general education courses and, as stated in the LSU general catalog, are “refined and focused in disciplinary courses taken during the junior and senior years, with the intention that all graduates, regardless of major, will develop a set of intellectual abilities, a degree of sophistication, and a civic-minded perspective that correspond to the high level of functionality represented in the outcomes taken as a whole.” An LSU graduate will be able to: “1) demonstrate effective communication of complex knowledge and ideas through written, oral, visual, and technological media; 2) demonstrate an understanding of historical, cultural, and philosophical complexity which supports sophisticated discourse; 3) conduct research-based inquiry, including articulation of complex disciplinary and interdisciplinary problems, effective evaluation and analysis of primary and secondary sources, and integration of relevant information into original discourse; 4) employ scientific and mathematical methods and technology in the resolution of laboratory and real-world problems; 5) demonstrate an understanding of the factors associated with global interdependence, including economic, political, psychological, cultural, and linguistic forces; 6) have the knowledge, skills, and disposition which attest to a commitment and ability to recognize and to participate in processes which improve the civic life of communities.” 20

These competencies are assessed annually by means of a rubric-based evaluation process through which scoring criteria are applied to samples of work produced by a random sample of graduating seniors in classes taken during their final semester of study. Individual student portfolios are reviewed by at least two assessment committee members who separately submit rubric scores for each of the learning competencies being assessed. When these scores vary by more than one point, another reconciles the score. Data obtained from this assessment protocol directly speak to the level of actual attainment of the university learning competencies at the time of graduation (and in QEP, will be complemented by analogous measures of some of the same students who go on to research).

10


Table III.A: Timeline of Selecting the QEP at LSU and Finalizing the Report (continues on next page)Date Event Comment

10.07.11 O’Neil appointed as chair of QEP Team

11.07.11 QEP Team meeting* Team charged with their responsibilities for the SACSCOC reaffirmation of accreditation

01.24.12 QEP Team meeting Community Moodle site available for team

02.09.12 QEP Team meetingReports from working groups; faculty/staff/employers/advisory board surveys; discussion of NSSE data; sub-group formed to write broadcast email for concept papers

02.17.12

QEP Team meeting: A broadcast email was sent to the faculty, staff, and students soliciting a short (2-3 page) concept paper for a QEP project. The solicitation for review was also available through the original QEP Website.

General education report; review of survey drafts

03.08.12 QEP Team meeting Update on SACSCOC website; surveys finalized; report on the assessment of mathematics at LSU.

03.23.1222 concept papers were received from nearly 40 groups or individuals (Appendix B) and were evaluated by the QEP Team using a rubric (Appendix C)

Each concept paper evaluated by at least three QEP Team members; scores of each concept paper tallied and concept papers ranked by score; four deemed inappropriate as a QEP

04.05.12Final review of the initial concept papers showed that acceptable concept papers fell into one of three overarching themes.

Proposers with projects falling into the categories of “Forging Connections,” “Student Engagement,” or “Undergraduate Research” invited to work together to develop a more formal QEP concept paper

04.16.12 QEP/SLO survey sent to students via broadcast email†

04.17.12 QEP/SLO survey sent to staff, faculty, and employers†

04.19.12 QEP Team meeting Review of concept papers

04.30.12 Survey results were obtained from the Office of Assessment and Evaluation. Survey data are in Tables III.B-E, Figures III.A-B

05.11.12Those with QEP concept papers falling into 3 overarching themes were invited to draft a better developed QEP project.

07.16.12 Final rubric review (similar to Appendix C) of the three proposals was completed by the QEP Team.

The two proposals scoring the highest were LSU-CREATE‡ (undergraduate research) and Student Engagement (Service-Learning and Internships).

09.05.12 QEP Team meeting Strengths and weaknesses of all three final concept papers were discussed.

10.30.12 The SACSCOC consultant met with the QEP Team. Consultant updated team on the QEP process.

11.6.12 QEP Team meetingPresentations made by those proposing the two highest ranked concept papers, LSU-CREATE‡,§ and Student Engagement

01.14.13 A straw poll was taken at the steering committee meeting between LSU-CREATE and Student Engagement.

At the steering committee meeting, members were asked to score the two potential QEPs for their relationship to the LSU mission statement, Flagship 2020 goals, quality of SLOs, ease of completion, accessibility, and financial implications.

01.15.13

The LSU-CREATE and Student Engagement team members were asked to prepare executive summaries of their potential QEP projects. A straw poll was taken at the Dean’s Council meeting between LSU-CREATE and Student Engagement.

At the Dean’s Council meeting, deans were asked to score the two potential QEPs for their relationship to the LSU mission statement, Flagship 2020 goals, quality of SLOs, ease of completion, accessibility, and financial implications.

11

Table III.A: Timeline of Selecting the QEP at LSU and Finalizing the Report (continued)Date Event Comment

01.28.13Receipt of executive summaries of LSU-CREATE and Student Engagement proposals; deans asked to comment on these executive summaries

02.05-11.13Deans’ comments were received on executive summaries of LSU-CREATE and Student Engagement proposals; feedback was solicited.

The deans endorsed LSU-CREATE‡ as the QEP. Clark (part of the LSU-CREATE‡ team) recused herself.

02.28.13QEP Team meeting: Executive summaries of the two potential proposals were reviewed with team member comments.

QEP Team informed of the deans’ endorsement.

03.11-13.13Votes were taken from the QEP Team and the steering committee, and LSU-CREATE‡ was endorsed as the QEP.

The QEP Team and the steering committee endorsed LSU-CREATE‡ as the QEP.

03.19.13A memo was sent to the provost with the recommendation that LSU-CREATE‡ be endorsed as the LSU QEP.

The provost forwarded the endorsement of LSU-CREATE‡ as LSU QEP to chancellor/president.

03.21.13 Chancellor/President Jenkins approved LSU-CREATE‡ as the QEP.

Invitations went out from the provost to form a QEP Implementation Committee (Appendix G).

04.18.13 The executive summary of LSU-CREATE‡ was sent to the LSU Office of Communications & University Relations.

05.14.13 QEP Team meeting SACSCOC consultant visit; QEP Team introduced to QEP Implementation Committee

06.04.13 QEP Team meeting SACSCOC VP was present; committee updated him on the selection process for the QEP.

07.05.13 Meeting with the LSU Office of Communications & University Relations team for QEP

09.27.13 QEP Team meeting Team was updated, and recommendations for QEP lead investigator were solicited.

10.15.13Draft of QEP document emailed to Student Advisory Board (Appendix M) and Student Government reading group for student feedback

10.30.13 Draft of QEP document sent to the SACSCOC consultant for comments

11.08.13

Revised draft of QEP document sent to QEP Team, QEP Implementation Committee, and advisory boards; reviewers supplied with scoring rubric for draft (based on SACSCOC guidelines)

11.13.13 QEP Team meeting to review member comments on the document

11.13-15.13Input from QEP Team, coupled with that of QEP implementation Committee and SACSCOC consultant were included in final document.

12.12.13Final QEP report text sent to the LSU Office of Communications & University Relations for final formatting/printing

* QEP Team Meeting minutes are available.

†Thequestionsforthedatausedaresuppliedinthecorrespondingfigure/tablecaptions

‡ LSU-CREATE was later re-branded as LSU Discover.

§ At this time, Information Literacy was considered as a separate and combined component of LSU CREATE. Ultimately, Information Literacy and LSU CREATE were combined into the single QEP LSU Discover.

Abbreviations: CCELL=Center for Community Engagement, Learning, and Leadership; CAS=Center for Academic Success

Chapter III Institutional Process

12


The extent to which the course of study has impacted the student’s attainment of the competencies is determined through an analysis of the data received from the assessment of graduating student portfolios cross-referenced to data from two standardized commercial assessments, the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and the Collegiate Learning Assessment.

Analysis of results from the 2012 assessment of the university learning competencies shows that there was a statistical difference among them (Table III.B). These results support the need for additional instructional emphasis on research-based inquiry in undergraduate study.

Table III.B: Results from University Learning Competencies, 2012Learning Competencies Number Total Mean Variance

1. Communication 184 638 3.47 0.82

2. Historical, Cultural, Philosophical 87 305 3.51 0.60

3. Research 100 310.5 3.11 0.99

4. Scientific/Math Principles 89 311.5 3.50 1.01

5. Global Interdependence 71 241 3.39 0.86

6. Civic Responsibilities 20 69.5 3.48 1.99

p=0.025

III.2.2 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) The director of the Office of Assessment and Evaluation (OAE) provided all LSU NSSE data from 2011 to the QEP team. These data were discussed at the QEP meeting on February 9, 2012. Complete survey data are available in the OAE; in light of the ultimate selection of undergraduate research as the QEP topic, only data pertaining to this topic are presented in Table III.C.

The NSSE data suggest that, although many seniors had participated in practicums, internships, research projects, or capstone courses during their undergraduate study, they did not necessarily use these experiences to communicate, in writing, the results or the effects of those research experiences, nor did they have the ability to integrate and interpret information from those experiences. These are critical and integral elements of the research process, and the comparatively low scores when compared with those of students at other universities suggest that LSU students are not acquiring maximal heuristic benefits of such experiences. The more formal training that these students will receive through the QEP process outlined herein, coupled with more direct assessment of student learning, will help identify areas and aspects of learning to be improved during the students’ research experiences. This is a principal advantage to the research focus of the QEP.

13

Table III.C: Comparison of LSU First-year and Senior Responses with Carnegie Class Peer Group Responses for Select Questions Related to Undergraduate Research or Skills/Accomplishments for NSSE 2011. (2009 data also available on request)Question Year LSU Carnegie Class NSSE

Practicum, internship, field experiences, co-op experience, or clinical assignment

FY 0.07 0.07 0.07

SR 0.58 0.52 0.50‡

Work on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements

FY 0.06 0.05 0.05

SR 0.24 0.24 0.20

Culminating senior experience (capstone courses, senior project or thesis, comprehensive, exam, etc.)

FY 0.02 0.02 0.02

SR 0.40 0.29‡ 0.32‡

Work on a paper or project requiring integrating ideas or information from various sources

FY 2.70 2.98‡ 3.10‡

SR 3.20 3.24 3.34‡

Making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how other gathered and interpreted data, and assessing the soundness of their conclusions

FY 2.82 2.88 2.95‡

SR 2.98 2.97 3.05

Number of written papers or reports 10 pages or moreFY 1.16 1.21* 1.27‡

SR 1.51 2.46† 1.62‡

Number of written papers or reports between 5 and 19 pagesFY 1.82 2.15‡ 2.20‡

SR 2.36 2.46‡ 2.54‡

* p<0.05; † p<0.01; ‡ p<0.001

Abbreviations:NSSE=NationalSurveyofStudentEngagement;FY=firstyear;SR=senior

III.2.3 Employer/Advisory Board Member, Student, and Faculty/ Staff SurveysThe QEP team developed three surveys that were e-mailed to specific groups: employers/advisory board members (n=45 respondents), to determine what knowledge or skills they wanted LSU graduates to have; students (n=443 respondents), to identify what elements of their instructional experience at LSU could be improved; and faculty/staff (n=666 respondents), to identify which practices could improve student learning or the learning environment at LSU.

The employer/advisory board survey provided respondents with a five-point Likert scale with categories ranging from not important (1 or 2) to very important (4 or 5). Representative survey questions and results are presented in Table III.D. Effective communication and critical thinking skills were ranked highly by respondents; not ranked as highly by them were the implementation of pedagogies associated with students’ acquisition of these skills. For example, respondents ranked a relationship between undergraduate research experiences and the following abilities or characteristics as “very important”: effective communication skills (98.6%),21,22,23 critical thinking skills (97.2%),21,22,23,24,26 integrity (88.7%),22,25 attention to detail (87.4%),23 life-long learning (85.9%),25 and personal initiative (85.9%).22 Employers clearly recognize significant benefits to student participation in undergraduate research, although they may not recognize how students can obtain these skills.26


14


Table III.D: Results from Employer/Advisory Board Survey April, 2013 Not Important

1 or 2Very important

4 or 5

Requiring programs or instruction that develop effective communication skills 0% 98.6%

Emphasizing programs or instruction that develop critical thinking skills 0% 97.2%

Instilling a sense of integrity in our student’s academic/personal lives 1.4% 88.7%

Developing work habits that emphasize attention to detail 1.4% 87.4%

Instilling the concept of life-long learning and a love for intellectual pursuit 4.2% 85.9%

Helping students develop a sense of personal initiative 4.2% 85.9%

Requiring internships and co-op experiences to familiarize students with careers and the world of work 2.8% 81.7%

Providing programs or instruction that promote interdisciplinary collaboration across disciplines and departments/units 5.7% 81.4%

Engaging students in rich intellectual experiences both inside and outside of the classroom 2.8% 74.7%

Instilling an understanding and appreciation of diversity 5.6% 70.4%

Providing experiences where teamwork and interaction with other students are a part of the learning experience 1.4% 68.6%

Offering scholarly research opportunities for undergraduates 8.6% 68.6%

Extending students’ scholarly pursuits to benefit our community, state, region, and the globe 4.2% 67.6%

Engaging students in economic, social, and cultural activities 8.4% 62%

Developing a sense of civic responsibility among our students 10% 60%

Increasing participation in diversity programming 11.8% 54.5%

Expanding supportive programs to minority, international, and first generational students 11.4% 51.4%

Encouraging study abroad and national student exchanges 24.3% 38.5%

Regarding students’ responses, Figure III.A shows that, while approximately 43% found that the amount of research in classes is “just right,” approximately 51% found the amount of research to be less than “just right.” Table III.E, addressing what students regarded as important for faculty to improve, shows that, although research was not the highest ranked, it was important. Key elements associated with research, such as working with others and providing information from outside sources, were among the most important findings from students.

Through the faculty/staff survey, respondents were asked what they thought were the three most important programs for engaging students. Faculty felt that practicums were most important, with nearly 60% of the faculty responding positively; this response was followed by research, at approximately 46%, and projects, with just over 40% (Figure III.B).

15

FIGURE III.A: Student Survey Data

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Too Much

Just Right

Too Little

Variety of Instructional Approaches

Experts to Class

Information about Outside Resources

Provide Feedback

Encourage Work with Other Students

Research

Percent

FIGURE III.B: Faculty Survey Data

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Major

Library

Support Using Tech

Help with Presentations

Specific Learning Strategies

How to Do Research

Class-Specific

Counseling

Faculty Mentoring

Help with Writing

Internships/Field Work

Percent

57.555.5

41.335.4

34.133.6

29.926.9

23.923.1

21.8

Table III.E: Students’ Ranking of What They Think is Most Important for Faculty to improve Area 1st (%) 2nd (%) 3rd (%)

Use a variety of instructional approaches 26.4 30.5 43.0

Invite outside experts to class 41.9 35.4 22.7

Provide information about outside resources 41.7 38.9 19.4

Provide regular feedback 15.7 28.7 55.6

Work with others 43.6 41.0 15.4

Research and conduct content-based inquiry 32.0 38.7 29.3


16


III.3 CONFERENCES ATTENDED AND ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION FROM EXTERNAL SOURCESAs part of the effort to understand more fully the QEP process, those faculty and staff members working on the QEP also attended conferences (Table III.F).

Table III.F: Conferences Attended and Information Gathering from External SourcesDate Event Attendees

12.03-06.11 Annual SACSCOC meeting in Orlando, FL Franks, Henry, Guillot, Matthews, O’Neil, Owens, Reeve

06.04.12 SACSCOC orientation meeting Bell, Henry, Monday, Reeve

07.29-31.12 SACSCOC Summer Institute Quality Enhancement and Accreditation in Atlanta, GA Henry, O’Neil

10.28-31.12 SACSCOC consultant to LSU

12.08-11.12 SACSCOC annual meeting in Dallas, TX Duran, Franks, Henry, Guillot, Matthews, O’Neil, Reeve

04.28-05.01.13 SACSCOC consultant to LSU


06.04-05.13 SACSCOC VP visits LSU

07.20-23.13 SACSCOC Institute on Quality Enhancement and Accreditation in Daytona Beach, FL Duran, Erdman


12.07-10.13 SACSCOC annual meeting in Atlanta, GA Alexander, Bell, Duran, Ferstel, Franks, Henry, Guillot, Matthews, O’Neil, Reeve

III.4 SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION OF INITIAL AND FINAL CONCEPT PAPERSFaculty, staff, and students were invited to submit brief (two-to-three page) concept papers for the QEP (Appendix B); invitations went out to the faculty via broadcast e-mails, a notice in LSU Communiqué, and the initial QEP Website. University alumni professors, chosen for excellence in undergraduate education, and targeted departments on campus, such as the Center for Community Engagement, Learning, and Leadership (CCELL), received individual invitations. Twenty-two concept papers were received. All concept papers were scored by at least three QEP team (Appendix A)members using a rubric (Appendix C) that included the problem statement, articulation with Flagship 2020, description of activities, measurable goals and outcomes, assessment methods, timeline, and estimated resources. The majority of the concept papers that were acceptable as QEPs could be included into one of three high-impact student engagement categories: first-year programs, undergraduate research, and student engagement via internships or service-learning. Authors of concept papers in these categories were invited to work together and submit a final concept paper. These, too, were scored using a rubric. The two highest scoring concepts were undergraduate research and student engagement.

III.5 FURTHER ASSESSMENT OF THE FINAL TWO CONCEPT PAPERSFollowing selection by the QEP team of these two potential QEP topics, both were assessed for correlation with the LSU mission, Flagship 2020 goals, existing assessment data, and how the topics would complement or extend existing programs. Overall, both potential topics were found to fit well with the mission and with the goals; however, undergraduate research was found to be a better fit with the opportunities identified through evaluation of existing data. Both topics were presented to the Faculty and Staff Senates and to the Student Government for informal feedback, and to the

17

QEP team, the SACSCOC steering committee, and the deans for formal feedback before the final recommendation was submitted to the provost. Appendix D shows a timeline of various interactions within the LSU community.

These groups were asked several questions for the purpose of comparing and contrasting the two proposals in terms of three categories of evaluation: (1) Institutional Mission and Planning: How well do the goals of this QEP proposal correspond to LSU’s institutional mission? Would accomplishment of this QEP directly improve institutional and student performance? If this QEP were successfully implemented, what is the likelihood that the results will be favorably regarded by LSU’s important stakeholders? (2) Goals, SLOs, and Assessment: SACSCOC requires that attainable goals that lead to measurable SLOs be the structural centerpiece of the QEP. Are the SLOs measurable and tied directly to institutional needs? How clear is the relationship between proposed activities of this QEP and the improvement of student learning, as tied to institutional needs? (3) Overall Evaluation of Acceptability: To what extent are the components of the plan acceptable or exceptional?

Other questions on leadership of the project and campus resources, including budgetary concerns, also were considered. Overall, the deans and the steering committee were unanimous in the choice of undergraduate research over engagement. Initially, the QEP team had been more divided, with 50% favoring undergraduate research, 30% favoring student engagement, and 20% split between the two projects; however, following discussion in QEP team meetings, the ultimate vote was a clear consensus for undergraduate research.

III.6 EXISTING UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH PROGRAMS AT LSUCampus-wide mentored undergraduate research at LSU started in 1989 with 10 students supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). Other programs followed: In 1992, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) funding allowed the establishment of a statewide undergraduate research program administered by the Louisiana Sea-Grant College Program at LSU with 10 students per year in research areas that promote stewardship of the state’s coastal resources. This program, the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP), continues; its purpose is to foster interest among talented undergraduate science students at LSU and other Louisiana universities in pursuing postgraduate studies in coastal and marine-related disciplines. In 1993, the U.S. Department of Education established the Ronald E. McNair Research Scholars Program at LSU, which has grown to support 30 students per year.

The growth of the campus-wide effort to involve undergraduates in research has been sustained primarily through grant funding in a handful of disciplines and through internal funding in several areas. For example, the College of Humanities & Social Sciences initiated the program “Aspiring Scholars Program in Research” (ASPIRE), while the College of Agriculture started an undergraduate research program that has supported over 150 student projects. Many non-STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) students are supported by the “Chancellors Future Leaders in Research” (CFLR) program, which launched in 1998 and which funds each year a four-year research opportunity for approximately 50 high-achieving incoming first-year students.

LSU’s initial and subsequent HHMI awards and other programs have been invaluable resources to leverage extramural support in STEM areas, including NSF, REU (Research Experiences for Undergraduates), and LSAMP (Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation) grants in biological sciences, mathematics, computer science, engineering, and chemistry. LSU also has been awarded two NIH ‘IDeA Networks of Biomedical Research Excellence’ grants through the National Center for


18


Research Resources that include significant undergraduate research opportunities. In 2009 LSU received an NIH IMSD (Initiative for Maximizing Student Development) award, and in fall 2013 LSU received a site visit from the W.M. Keck Foundation for the first time for a coastal sustainability-based program involving the School of Architecture, the School of Landscape Architecture, the College of Engineering, the Honors College, and the School of the Coast & Environment.

The impact of these largely externally funded awards has been that mentored undergraduate research has grown to over 150 students now supported by extramural, summer, and academic-year programs across campus. A major summer undergraduate poster session that has run for many years now involves well over 100 posters and enjoys strong support, but occurs mainly in support of grant-supported summer programs and at a period when the majority of LSU undergraduates are not on campus. Another, more recent, fall poster session is operated under the university’s Office of Strategic Initiatives and was launched with a grant from the NSF. The QEP will afford more LSU students the opportunity to perform undergraduate research and, more importantly, will provide opportunities for enhancement and integrated assessment of the undergraduate research on campus, responding to the NSSE data of Section III.2.2.

III.7 FOCUS GROUPS AND PILOT STUDIES

Focus Group Discussions To understand more fully the students’ knowledge and understanding of undergraduate research, four focus group discussions with 25 randomly selected students were held in the Office of Assessment & Evaluation. Overall, most students could explain what research is in general terms; however, they lacked an understanding of the role of research at LSU. Although they did not know what being a Research I university meant, they were aware that a large portion of the faculty conducts research in addition to teaching. Students displayed an understanding that there are different types of research, depending on the discipline. One major concern that the students had was that, if an undergraduate student at LSU wished to participate in research, s/he must seek out the opportunity to do so. Students also felt that some professors used undergraduate students as unpaid helpers to do menial and repetitive tasks, a situation that discouraged students who wanted to assist with research. Students desired more opportunities to help with research but did not want these opportunities to be limited to only a part of a class. Students who wished to attend graduate school expressed a need for more undergraduate research opportunities.

Pilot Studies Two pilots of the curricular transformation component currently (Section VI.2) are being conducted: one—associated with the B.S. in Coast & Environment, currently in its first semester—initiates students into a progressive multi-semester research curriculum through an introductory first-year course; the other—associated with the School of Architecture, currently in its 2nd semester—starts the multi-semester research process in the third year of the five-year program. Additional pilot studies in mentored research and Research Day are discussed in Sections VI.3 and VI.4.

19

IV. LSU Discover Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

IV.1 DEFINITION OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH Careful attention to existing literature on undergraduate research provided the basis for the functional definition used by LSU Discover:

At LSU, undergraduate research involves inquiries or investigations, conducted by undergraduate students, under faculty guidance, that solve problems, make original intellectual contributions, or make creative contributions to a discipline or practice.

This definition is consistent with formal scholarly discourse on the topic.27 Presentations to campus stakeholders and accompanying discussion revealed that, while no single definition of undergraduate research could capture the breadth of research activities, units were nonetheless comfortable with descriptors sufficiently broad to include the varying characteristic practices and specific valuing of research in disparate fields. For example, while departments in the College of Art & Design may embrace the definition in the context of creative disciplinary or practical contributions, those in other colleges may find the focus on scientific or humanistic investigations more suitable. As an acknowledgment of the variety of approaches to research at LSU, the Office of Communications & University Relations collaborated with the leadership of each of the 12 colleges at LSU to develop customized college logos. Three examples are shown in Figure IV.A.

IV.2 SLOSLSU Discover addresses the following SLOs. LSU graduates who have attained competence in the understanding and conducting of research will be able to

• identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information and/or literature sources associated with a research project, (referred to in the following text as SLO1-literacy for ease of comprehension);

• utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem (SLO2-methods);

• demonstrate awareness of the responsible conduct of research (SLO3-ethics);• identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question (SLO4-idea);

and• articulate research findings through written, visual, performance, and/or oral presentation

(SLO5-communication).

FIGURE IV.A Examples of Three Customized College Logos. From left, logos representing the College of Art + Design, the E. J. Ourso College of Business, and the College of Science.

20


IV.3 PRIMARY METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING LSU DISCOVER SLOS: THE DIGITAL RESPONSE FOLIO (DRF)An integrated system of DRFs constitutes the primary methodology for both formative and summative assessment of students’ levels of attainment of the LSU Discover SLOs (see Figure IV.B). The focal point of this system is an electronic folio (e-portfolio) titled LSU Discover (primary) that is organized around the five SLOs. This folio serves both as a longitudinal receptacle of artifacts that students produce through formal participation in LSU Discover courses and programmatic interventions, and as a means through which program evaluators assess and report students’ achievement of learning outcomes. Each participating LSU Discover student is provided with an individual or personal digital folio organized on the same principle as the primary folio. Through the electronic interface of the primary DRF with the individual folio, students upload artifacts produced for faculty in the ordinary course of their studies, guided by instructions provided administratively by LSU Discover, by faculty mentors, and by faculty teaching in transformed curricula. Periodic evaluation of these artifacts in relation to specific LSU Discover SLOs is coordinated by the LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) with support from the Office of Assessment & Evaluation.

Figure IV.C shows the format of the LSU Discover Primary DRF. The structure of the folio involves a section for each of the SLOs, which are listed horizontally on the left side of the page, with sub-sections for the two LSU Discover major interventions, “Mentoring” and “Curriculum Change,” residing below each outcome. For example, a student in a transformed curriculum taking a course that addresses SLO1-literacy would upload to the “Curriculum Change” sub-section under SLO1-literacy a file containing an annotated bibliography developed in response to a course assignment pertaining to this outcome. During a designated evaluation period, two faculty members independently score the bibliography using an electronic version of the rubric associated with SLO1-literacy (see also Section X). The basis of assessment is a separate detailed rubric for each of the five outcomes. Informed by Bloom’s hierarchy of learning domains, the rubric carefully demarcates

FIGURE IV.B: The Integrated System of Digital Response Folios

Co-Curricular Activities

QEP Assessment Committee

Mentored Research Curricular Transformation

LSU Discover Digital Response Folio

Student’s Digital Self

Research Day

SLO 1,3 SLO 3-5

3 of SLO 1-5SLO 1-5

21

the degrees of student attainment of the outcome. Each rubric is organized into rows of sub-categories of the outcome, with columns of information moving across the page in a left-to-right diagram of succinct statements that reflect the level of learning, lower to higher, associated with the aspect of the outcome represented in the row. (See Appendix F for the current draft of the rubric for SLO3-ethics.) For all assessments, teams of two reviewers assign a score that corresponds to the indicated level of achievement for each subcategory of the outcome. Once all artifacts in a particular component of the assessment have been evaluated and reconciled, the scores for each sub-construct and for the overall construct or SLO are aggregated and reported to the assessment committee for interpretation.

Results of this primary assessment process are triangulated with the results of various secondary assessments described in Section VI with the schedule of assessment for each outcome corresponding to the various longitudinal components of the five-year process. At a minimum, the relationship between specific LSU Discover interventions and students’ learning is evaluated at least yearly for each SLO through valid and reliable scrutiny of representative samples of students’ work. At the end of each academic year, the assessment committee evaluates the results of the various rubric-based assessments and reports results to the QEP director and implementation/operation committee and to the provost. The results are used formatively as the assessment committee distributes the results to academic units and faculty so that adjustments to details of the various LSU Discover interventions may be undertaken as suggested by the interpretation of the data.

IV.4 LEARNING E-PORTFOLIOEach LSU Discover student participating in mentored research develops and attaches to the appropriate space in the primary folio, once at the beginning of each semester of participation and once at the end, a short guided reflection on the current status of the student’s research interest. The expectation is that the individual student not only will grow in the direction of the SLOs as participation in LSU Discover advances across time, but also that, through repetition of the guided reflections and creative/research summaries, the student will become more adept at recognizing her/his increasing research abilities and at writing about them, with the necessary result that insights into the complexity of the research problem will be enhanced. These advances in knowledge and ability necessarily increase in instances in which the mentor participates in a feedback loop that is available through the DRF system.

IV.5 SLO5-COMMUNICATION AND THE STUDENT’S DIGITAL SELF-REPRESENTATION AS COMPETENT RESEARCHER—THE DIGITAL SELF (EXCLUSIVE TO MENTORED STUDENTS AND SELECT DEGREE PROGRAMS) As each student progresses in the development of SLOs associated with LSU Discover research experiences, LSU Discover provides ongoing assistance in the development of a “digital self,” or personal e-portfolio, that essentially is an evolving representation or résumé that emphasizes professional experience and academic success. The digital self-image is informed fundamentally

FIGURE IV.C: Example of TaskStream Primary DRF

GENERAL INFORMATION

• SLO1-literacy: Knowledge of Lit• Mentoring – Student Product(s) [SLO1]• Curriculum Change – Student Product(s) [SLO1]

• SLO2-methods: Research Method• Mentoring – Student Product(s) [SLO2]• Curriculum Change – Student Product(s) [SLO2]

• SLO3-ethics: Ethics of Research• Mentoring – Student Product(s) [SLO3]• Curriculum Change – Student Product(s) [SLO3]

• SLO4-idea: Define Research Idea• Mentoring – Student Product(s) [SLO4]• Curriculum Change – Student Product(s) [SLO4]

• SLO5-communication: Communicate Research Findings• Mentoring – Student Product(s) [SLO5]• Curriculum Change – Student Product(s) [SLO5]

Chapter IV LSU Discover SLOs

22


by the student’s ongoing, systematic, “guided” documentation of the longitudinal learning process. Upon entering the LSU Discover process, the student acquires an account with TaskStream Learning Achievement Tools (funded for a four-year period via the QEP), through which the student uses the features of the platform to develop an ongoing representation of the personal, “digital self” as researcher, necessarily including particular aspects of the image the student would portray to the professional world. LSU Discover provides the student with the fundamental components that necessarily comprise the representational or digital self. The student adds selectively to this foundation other digital components as research skills and personal sophistication develop across time. Some degree programs participating in curricular transformation include the digital self as a staple component of the process of becoming an effective researcher. All students participating in mentored research are strongly encouraged to develop the personal e-portfolio to demonstrate attainment of SLO5-communication, and the necessary support for effecting this digital representation of the research undertaken through their participation in LSU Discover is readily provided to the student by LSU Discover and TaskStream support staff.

IV.6 OVERVIEW OF QEP PROGRAM ACTIVITIESOverall, LSU Discover enhances the SLOs introduced above in the context of the four major activities (Table IV.A). Each of these activities is further described in Section VI.

Table IV.A: Overview of LSU Discover Activities

QEP Activities Purpose Student Impact (Who) Alterations (What) Timing (When) Mechanisms (How)

Co-curricular Activities

Introduce large numbers of students to research

First – and second-year students

Building student research-based learning skills through courses, workshops, online tutorials, and other events

Years 1-5; emphasis on development of these activities will be on the front end

Incorporation into LSU 1001, LIS 1001, First Year Experience, Residential Colleges, CAS, and development of workshops and tutorials

Curricular Transformation

Promote research-intensive course availability and develop multi-semester, discipline-specific training in undergraduate research

Students in degree programs, from first-year students to graduating seniors

Increased availability of research-intensive courses and permanent changes in degree program curricula that enhance research training

Years 1-5; pilot programs in architecture and coastal environmental science began in year 0

Departmental/college QEP-funded, integrated curricular change proposals; Faculty QEP-funded course change proposals

Mentored Research

Promote one-on-one student mentor relationships that last multiple semesters

First year to seniors, depending upon when the student begins

Increased number of students participating in mentored research and research-for-credit

Years 1-5; Development of mentor workshops; increased number of faculty mentors; off-campus industrial mentorships; thesis/capstone student recognition

Research Day Expose large numbers of students to research; forum for students to develop presentations skills

All student presenters and all students visiting the Research Day events, as well as faculty visitors

Organized campus-wide forum for students to present their research and network with other students, faculty, and community

Years 1-5; it is anticipated that Research Day will expand into Research Week

Development of workshops on presentation skills; forum for research presentations; department research “open houses”

23

V. Literature Review and Best Practices

V.1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Regarding its classification as a Research I University, LSU has both the obligation and the responsibility to provide undergraduates with high impact educational practices, such as undergraduate research, as indicated in such resources as the Boyer report,28 which documents the high impact practices presented by Kuh.29 The NSF has also recognized the importance of involving undergraduates in research.30 When developing the proposed QEP, peer-reviewed literature and published educational reports and practices at other universities were studied. Practices identified are compared with the SLOs and with the planned strategies for implementing LSU Discover.

Research into educational practices that correlate with student learning, creativity, retention, graduation, and successful high level employment consistently demonstrates the strong heuristic value that formal research adds to the student experience. The impact of research on many outcomes for undergraduate students is well documented and it includes skills development,21 better retention and graduation rates,31,32 and a higher percentage of students going on to graduate and professional school.22,33,34 Hurtado, et al.,35 reported that institutionally provided, structured opportunities for research, especially biomedical research, were key predictors for the success of all early students, but particularly for African American students. In STEM fields, Thirty found that undergraduate participation in authentic research is an “effective way to socialize novices into the scientific research community” and help them “develop mastery, knowledge, skills, and behaviors necessary to become a scientist.” 35

Participation in undergraduate research also increases students’ understanding of the research process and gives them increased confidence in their skills and abilities.35 Kardash found that, after participating in undergraduate research, students were more likely to be able to formulate a hypothesis, analyze data, orally communicate research results, and think critically.20 Similar findings were mentioned in other studies,25 notably that students who participated in undergraduate research over a three-year period “reported gains on skills such as design and hypothesis formation, data interpretation, and information literacy” along with professionalism. Improved problem-solving ability has also been shown in students participating in undergraduate research.24 In the LSU employer/advisory board survey that helped to inform this QEP, respondents regarded effective communication and critical thinking skills as the two most highly desired outcomes (Section III.1).

An undergraduate research experience or other creative activity has also been shown to enhance personal growth beyond specific research skills.36 Students who had participated in an undergraduate research activity perceived the benefit as “very important” or “extremely important.” 25

Studies also have shown that participation in undergraduate research helps students define career goals and solidify the choice of a college major.34,38,39

Research experience for students in the sophomore year appears to be particularly effective,32 and earlier and longer involvement increases the positive effects.34 Students who participate in multiple semesters of undergraduate research increase their grade point averages in comparison to those who do not.40 Participation in undergraduate research has also been shown to be particularly effective for the retention and graduation of minority students with low grade point averages.32 Other studies reveal that most students who participate in competitive undergraduate research opportunities in the sciences and social sciences are those with higher GPAs.34 These examples argue strongly for broad-based, non-competitive, early preparations, such as those which inform LSU Discover.

24


Although undergraduate research has always had the most traction in the STEM disciplines, research-rich campuses are increasingly recognizing the desirability of providing students with focused research opportunities across all undergraduate curricula. Students across the sciences, social sciences, and humanities have found participation to be positive, stating that the experience increased their problem-solving and communication abilities.31 Participating students in the STEM disciplines have tended to value acquiring technical knowledge of procedures and equipment, while those in social sciences/humanities valued opportunities to gain publication.31

Regarding undergraduate research and information literacy (IL)(SLO1), Grafstein states the importance of discipline-based IL (SLO1) instruction shared by librarians and teaching faculty in the discipline, noting that knowledge (as opposed to information) requires context for its existence41. Belanger found that, for many students, taking a research seminar involving library instruction was most valuable in helping them refine and explore research topics.42 In addition, assessment of students’ research processes was improved when librarians worked closely with faculty to embed information literacy assessments into course assignments. Farrell43 explored the relationship between generic IL and IL situated within a discipline, surveying literature that supports the use of both approaches and noting that generic offerings lead to discipline-based offerings as student skills increase. Morgan and Yakel, reviewing the literature on student use of primary source materials for research, documented the benefits of library instruction on student outcomes and attitudes.44

Writing about the value of high-impact practices, Kuh29 noted a tendency in the academy toward a “reshaping” of “courses to connect key concepts and questions with students’ early and active involvement in . . . research” for the purpose of involving “students with actively contested questions, empirical observation, cutting-edge technologies, and the sense of excitement that comes from working to answer important questions.”

In addition to analyses of undergraduate research and of strategies for incorporating active learning in general education and other large courses, there are growing efforts to holistically embed research-based education in disciplinary curricula. For instance, Walkington45 has considered the geography curriculum, Haag46,47 has considered factors that favor attrition or persistence in engineering, and Richmond48 comments on agriscience. LSU Discover will be informed by the peer-reviewed literature in the active learning area.

While the literature on digital or e-portfolios is more recent (fewer than 50 citations were found on e-portfolios), it is rapidly evolving. Early publications note value for non-traditional students,49 lifelong learning,9 and university-wide implementation.51 A range of aspects related to assessment and reporting characterize much of the literature, with attention to learning-style diagnosis,46 information literacy,53 faculty response,54 and longitudinal impact.55

25

V.2 BEST PRACTICES In 2011, LSU became an institutional member of the Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR), and in anticipation of a potential QEP theme on this topic, in May 2012 four members of what became the QEP implementation committee (see Appendix G) attended a CUR institute and conference on “Sustaining Undergraduate Research Programs” that exposed them to a range of national best practices, including those explicitly articulated by CUR in its “COEUR” document.60 These include (1) a long-term commitment by the institution to undergraduate research, (2) multiple opportunities for students to engage in research across their college careers, (3) inclusion of all disciplines, and (4) recognition of faculty effort in supervising research experiences, including receiving course credit and recognition of this effort in promotion and tenure procedures. Documentation for these best practices also recommend that faculty accompany students to conferences and advocate for public recognition of research accomplishments. Best practices in the curricula also should support a strong undergraduate research program. Appropriate classroom and lab training in necessary techniques within any discipline are essential. Additionally, existing laboratory classes should go beyond normal “canned” experiments and add real world problems to bring unity and a sense of discovery to the course. Finally, the document recommends workshops for students in topics such as research ethics, discipline-appropriate communication (e.g., papers, presentations, posters), and applying for funding. Other CUR publications address bringing undergraduate research into the classroom. These include offering writing experience relevant to the scholarly discourse of their discipline, employing research methods courses actually to gather and analyze real data, using real world problems in lab courses, and performing research as part of a capstone course.

LSU Discover, with its focus on specific SLOs, was conceived in accordance with established best practices and will continue to be informed by emerging best practices within its peer community. For example, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) established Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education56 that define IL as “the set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyze, and use information.” The concept of discipline-based IL instruction, shared by librarians and teaching faculty in the discipline, stresses the idea that knowledge (as opposed to information) requires context for its existence.57 Many students taking a research seminar in library skills have noted that this manner of instruction was highly valuable in helping them refine and explore research topics.58 Moreover, assessment of students’ research processes was improved when librarians worked closely with faculty to embed information literacy assessments into course assignments. The ACRL competency standards, which align with LSU Discover SLOs, assert that an information-literate person should be able to determine the extent of information needed, access it effectively and efficiently, and evaluate it critically (SLO1-literacy); access and use information ethically and legally; and understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information (SLO3-ethics).

Chapter V Literature Review and Best Practices

26


V.3 BEST PRACTICES AT OTHER INSTITUTIONSThis report is closely modeled on best practices established for undergraduate research programs. For example, in implementing its QEP on undergraduate research, the University of Houston surveyed the best practices across multiple institutions and employed CUR guidelines. Five best practices from the Houston effort include (1) a common, university-wide database of research opportunities available to undergraduates, (2) small grants made available for undergraduates for travel/research materials, (3) a university-wide event that showcases undergraduate research, (4) work-study support for students to participate in undergraduate research, and (5) multiple-semester research experiences. QEP implementation committee comparatively studied eight other institutions with either QEP efforts or long-standing undergraduate programs, yielding the examples in Table V.A that inform the LSU Discover interventions presented in the next section. The implementation committee also had extensive contact with the University of Houston and Florida Atlantic University regarding a range of best practices on several occasions.

Table V.A: LSU Discover Activities Based on Best Practices of Other Institutional ProgramsLSU Discover Activity Institutional Model for Best Practices

Co-curricular activities: introduction; skill-building; support Florida Atlantic University, University of Houston, Morehead State University, University of Central Florida

Curricular transformation: curricular change grant program; faculty development

University of Houston, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Florida Atlantic University

Mentored research experience: mentoring database; workshops for mentors; partnerships with off-campus industry partners; thesis/capstone recognition

University of Houston, University of Central Florida, Florida Atlantic University, George Mason University, Baylor University

LSU Discover Research Day: recognition for undergraduate researchers and mentors; exposure of large numbers of students to undergraduate research; development of communication skills for presenters

University of Washington, University of Houston, University of North Alabama, George Mason University, Baylor University

27

VI. Actions to Be Implemented

VI.1 CO-CURRICULAR OPPORTUNITIES

VI.1.1 Summary of Current Co-curricular Activities Relating to Undergraduate Research at LSU and the Need for Such Activities Currently, co-curricular opportunities associated with undergraduate research are limited to communication-focused workshops hosted by the Communication Across the Curriculum (CxC) program and the LIS 1001: Research and Methods, a one-credit course offered by the libraries. Although LSU offers students a variety of workshops covering topics such as career exploration; reading and writing; learning; test-taking; and time, stress, and financial management, no general, university-wide, co-curricular support or scaffolding for participation in undergraduate research currently exists at LSU. This section will show how LSU Discover will create and coordinate research-focused, co-curricular opportunities to expand participation in undergraduate research by students in all colleges and programs. LSU Discover will establish new opportunities and publicize existing opportunities to all students. In addition, it will track student participation in research and inquiry activities, measure the impact of student participation, and recognize student successes. These activities have already begun, with several pilots currently underway that are discussed in the timeline in Section VIII and shown in a marketing timeline (see Appendix H).

VI.1.2 A Formal Structure for Co-curricular Activities at LSU The co-curricular activities of LSU Discover serve as important means of informing large numbers of students, particularly at an early stage in their college careers, about the benefits of undergraduate research and various institutional avenues for participation. The activities are modest in scope and specific in their content, making them easily accessible to students, with minimal initial investments of time and effort. Each activity gives students opportunities to learn about introductory elements of the nature of research and creativity, with emphasis on LSU Discover learning outcomes, including information literacy and the responsible conduct of research. Students are encouraged to participate in multiple activities, and via this process, develop knowledge and skills that increase the likelihood that they will eventually work with a faculty mentor in a multi-semester research experience. The co-curricular activities also enhance critical thinking skills and help students understand how research relates to the private sector in certain degree programs.

Co-curricular activities associated with LSU Discover are focused in three related and reinforcing initiatives: introduction and exposure; development of skills and knowledge-base; and cultivation of a strong LSU Discover community and support system, including peer mentoring, as well as networking outside the university.

To support these co-curricular efforts, the QEP implementation committee (Appendix G) has secured the collaboration of LSU Student Life & Enrollment—which includes Residential Life, First Year Experience [FYE], and the Center for Academic Success—the LSU Libraries, Communication Across the Curriculum, the Student Government Association, Greek Life, and curriculum-specific student organizations. To ensure good communication and coordination of efforts among the participants, the LSU Discover implementation committee has established a Council on Co-curricular Activities (CCA). The CCA includes representatives from among these collaborators, as well as the director and coordinator of LSU Discover and a representative from the Office of Communications & University Relations. (See Appendix I for the CCA membership.)

28


With input from the CCA, the implementation committee oversees the implementation of co-curricular programs shown in Tables VI.A.1-VI.A.3.

VI.1.2.1 Initiative One: Implement introduction and exposure activities to ensure that students become aware of LSU Discover early in their undergraduate careers and that they are offered specific experiences designed to recruit them into participation in LSU DiscoverBy expanding an array of co-curricular activities, LSU Discover increases the exposure of undergraduates to examples of • the personal and professional benefits that accrue from involvement in research as an

undergraduate, • how other undergraduates are benefiting from participation in research opportunities, and • research opportunities that are open to undergraduates through coursework or mentoring.

Efforts focused on reaching incoming first-year students living in the residence halls on campus include training residential assistants (RA) to discuss LSU Discover opportunities and hosting residential college presentations by mentor/student pairs, alumni, and other professionals. For these students, as well as students living off-campus, LSU Discover also incorporates an introductory workshop, “LSU Discover: How to Get Involved.” The key contributors to these efforts are a librarian, detailed to LSU Discover; current faculty/student mentoring pairs; off-campus participants, such as industrial representatives and alumni; and Residential Life RAs.

The LSU Discover Implementation Committee/Operations Committee also collaborates with partners on campus, such as the Veterinary Medicine School; within the LSU System, such as the Pennington Biomedical Research Center and Center for Advanced Microstructures and Devices (CAMD); and partners in business and industry who provide a combination of information about opportunities and contacts to help students connect with mentors and research-for-credit opportunities. These efforts, specified in Table VI.A.1, create networking/information pathways for students to become active in undergraduate research.

29

Table VI.A.1: Introduction and Awareness Activities

Planned Learning Activity Outcome Person Responsible Activity Frequency # of Students

A. Residential college presentation by mentor/student pair specific to the residence discipline, or alum/other professional now employed in a research-intensive field

Exposure to benefits, opportunities, and themes of undergraduate research (UR)

LSU Discover librarian, mentor/student pairs, alumni, other professionals

Presentation 2x per year per hall; 360 students/year minimum

B. Visit to research facility such as Pennington Biomedical Research Center, ExxonMobil, CAMD, or production facility, such as Celtic Media Centre

Introduction, orientation to UR

LSU Discover director, LSU Discover coordinator, industry partner

2 field trips per year; 80 students minimum

C. LSU Discover: How to get involved, what to expect

Introduction, orientation to UR

LSU Discover librarian, LSU Discover director, LSU Discover coordinator, faculty

2 workshops per year; 40 students

D. Display in residence halls and Middleton Library of posters created by undergraduate researchers

Exposure to LSU Discover opportunities, recognition from UR participation

LSU Discover librarian, LSU Discover coordinator, residence hall staff, and libraries staff

2 displays rotating monthly; 5,000 students

E. Participate in ORED Science Café by having an outreach table and/or representatives from LSU Discover at each event

Exposure to LSU Discover LSU Discover Coordinator, LSU Discover Director, other faculty and student participants

Outreach: 1 per year; 40 students minimum

F. RAs in residential colleges discuss LSU Discover as part of their mandated individual interviews with students in fall semester

Exposure to LSU Discover LSU Discover librarian, LSU Discover coordinator, and RAs

Personal interaction; 600 per semester

Activity A will be piloted in year zero, while B and C will start in the first year. Activities D and E will start in the second year, while activity F will launch in the third year. For activity A, the LSU mentor database will be used initially to solicit faculty who have mentored in multiple research programs as described in Section VI.3.3.

VI.1.2.2 Initiative Two: Develop students’ skill sets and knowledge base via workshops and online tutorialsInitiative Two broadens support for students involved in LSU Discover by providing them with co-curricular resources for building skills and knowledge. These resources include workshops and tutorials designed to improve information literacy (SLO1-literacy), develop understanding of the requirements of ethical conduct of research (SLO3-ethics), and develop communication and presentation skills (SLO5-communication). These efforts complement learning outcomes gained through curricular change and mentoring activities described in Sections VI.2 and VI.3.

Functioning as recruitment tools, these workshops will be open to all students, but where availability is limited, students already enrolled in LSU Discover (see Section VI.1.4 for enrollment) will have priority for participation. Online tutorials are a means through which LSU Discover provides broad-based support to participating students in a scalable manner. Development of these asynchronous online offerings will be led by a full-time, dedicated librarian, will involve collaboration with the Center for Academic Success (CAS), and will multiply the efforts of librarians and disciplinary faculty. Online offerings have the advantage of being available any time to students at their self-identified point of need.

Chapter VI Actions To Be Implemented

30


Table VI.A.2: Skill Set/knowledge-base Building Activities

SLO Activity Examples Person(s) Responsible Frequency, # students

1 G. Workshop or online tutorials (information literacy)

Introduction to (1) library research methods; (2) developing critical thinking skills, metacognition

LSU Discover librarian, CAS 2 x per semester, plus on demand; 80 in person, plus 240 virtual per year

1 H. One credit courses (1) LSU 1001: LSU Discover (2) LIS 1001: Research Methods and Materials

LSU Discover librarian, residence hall rectors, library instruction faculty

2 per year each; 44 students each

3 I. On-line courses (ethics)

(1) NIH human subject training; (2) responsible conduct of research; (3) animal care; (4) biosafety

Existing Responsible Conduct of Research Certification program tracked by LSU Discover coordinator

On demand; 120 student per year for each subject

3 J. Workshop/ online tutorial (Scientific Method)

The scientific method and ethical conduct of research

STEM faculty, LSU Discover librarian

2 per year in person; 44 students; on demand virtual; 40 students

K. Workshop or online tutorial (communication workshops)

(1) Abstract writing workshops; (2) poster design workshops (3) how to use presentation software effectively; (4) stand and deliver: public speaking for the novice

Mentors, CxC, LSU Discover librarian

8 per year in person (2 of each workshop); on demand virtual; 160 students in person; 80 students virtual

Activity G will be piloted in year zero. In the first year, a basic array is offered (activities H and I), designed specifically to support participation in the campus-wide undergraduate Research Days described in Section VI.4. Activities J and K will start in year two. The basic array is augmented with subject-specific offerings developed in years two through five of the QEP, based on recommendations from faculty working with students participating in programs with changed curricula and those participating in mentored research.

Through SLO3-ethics, LSU Discover directly aligns with ongoing institutional efforts to enhance the training of researchers and will make use of LSU’s institutional subscription to Responsible Conduct of Research Certification and several related training programs through CITIprogram.org. These include area-specific training (Biomedical, Social and Behavioral, Physical Science, and Humanities responsible conduct of research courses, as well as the Responsible Conduct of Research Course for Engineers). LSU Discover will also link to an NIH course on human subject training.

Activity K involves the sessions listed here and workshops in support of SLO5-communication and of the Research Day activities discussed in Section VI.4:

• Symposium Information Sessions: Introductions to Research Day, the application process, and event procedures

• Abstract Writing Workshops: Instruction in abstract-writing, including information on determining what constitutes an abstract, how to write one, and what information to include

• Poster Design Workshops: Instruction in how to design a poster, what information to include, and how to draw the attention of the audience through the use of visual aids

• PowerPoint Presentation Workshops: Instruction in how to organize a PowerPoint presentation, how to design slides, and how to draw the attention of the audience

• Oral/Creative Presentation Practice Sessions: Practice and feedback on oral or creative presentations

http://CITIprogram.org

31

VI.1.2.3 Initiative Three: Cultivate, support, and enhance the LSU Discover communityInitiative Three reinforces the success of students participating in LSU Discover by providing peer support, strengthening the sense of community among participants, and providing opportunities for extramural networking. The national Council on Undergraduate Research has identified community building as an important “best practice,” enabling undergraduates to benefit from a research-rich environment and to learn from their peers. The programs and activities associated with this strategy provide scaffolding to support the changes occurring through both curricular transformations and mentoring by encouraging and reinforcing student participation.

Table VI.A.3: Research Community Cultivation and Networking ActivitiesActivity Person Responsible Frequency # of students

L. Information sessions about the undergraduate research symposium

LSU Discover Coordinator, LSU Discover Director

2 sessions (Bengal Bound; Tiger Bridge); 200-300 students

M. Practice sessions for undergraduate researchers selected for participation in the URS

LSU Discover Coordinator, LSU Discover faculty mentors, Res. Life, Greek Life

3 sessions, 18 student presenters, plus 30 student audience members

N. Discipline-centric support-group meetings for participants in mentored research

LSU Discover Coordinator & students Monthly, 100 students in 5 – 7 separate groups

O. Senior students mentor students entering into mentored research projects

LSU Discover Coordinator, LSU Discover faculty mentors

Monthly, 10 mentors, 10 students

P. Mentoring workshops for peer mentors LSU Discover Director, LSU Discover Coordinator, LSU Discover faculty mentors, Res. Life

Offered 4 times (for res halls and Greek Life), 10 student mentors

Activities include such simple and obvious measures as creating and maintaining a presence for LSU Discover using social media. The LSU Discover coordinator will organize, with assistance and collaboration of College Advisory Board members (Appendix J) and participating faculty, group activities for students that will be specifically keyed to supporting mentored research, curricular change, and the Research Day activities. Activities L and M will start in year one, while activities N, O, and P will launch in year two.

VI.1.3 Assessment of Co-curricular ActivitiesAlthough most of the co-curricular activities described above are associated with specific SLOs, the primary purpose of the activities is to inform students about LSU Discover and to provide formative support for building the skills and knowledge base that will stand as scaffolding for their participation in further research activities. Importantly, the activities are also designed to encourage them to participate in a multi-semester research experience. The most elementary assessment criterion is simple participation in events. LSU Discover will track attendance at presentations and in-person participation in all co-curricular workshops/tutorials using a card swipe device associated with student ID cards (currently available from Student Services). Virtual participation (tutorials, ethics training courses) will be tracked via online login. In addition to providing data about numbers of students participating, this will also allow us to track which students participate in more than one activity and correlate that information with their participation in other LSU Discover programs.

LSU Discover has set as a benchmark participation of at least 2,000 students per year in trackable co-curricular activities (activities A, E, F, G, H, I, J, K).

Brief pre- and post-tests will be used in each workshop/online tutorial. These assessments will provide formative information about students’ progress toward the SLOs and gauge the effectiveness of the offerings so that they can be modified and improved over the course of the QEP.


32


VI.1.4 Enrollment and Tracking of Co-curricular ActivitiesThe three tables in this section (Tables VI.B.1-V1.B.3) list a broad range of activities, each providing experiences that are both easily accessible to students and provide compelling impetus for them to participate further in undergraduate research. The goal of maximizing the number of students involved in LSU Discover co-curricular activities makes it imperative to provide efficient data collection and management systems.

In collaboration with the LSU Office of the Registrar, the implementation team has established a method by which students participating in their choice of any four trackable co-curricular activities (categories A, B, C, G, H, I, J, K) will be tagged in their student records by the LSU Registrar as being “enrolled” in LSU Discover. At that point, the students will be eligible for the various awards described in the following sections.

This tracking also facilitates assessment of learning outcome gains over a multi-semester period, including differentiation among the various categories of student participants; reduces the susceptibility of information loss with staff turnover; alleviates overburdening the LSU Discover coordinator with repetitive manual data entry; and allows LSU Discover to be relatively non-intrusive to faculty members.

Overall, this section has shown how LSU Discover will achieve the crucial goal of better preparing students early in their undergraduate studies potentially to continue with undergraduate research. Not all students will elect to take the next steps (Sections VI.2 and Section VI.3) that follow the introductory activities, integrating them into a coherent four-year research program; nonetheless large numbers of students will be introduced and informed about research, its value, and norms for its responsible conduct in manners heretofore unavailable at LSU.

VI.2 CURRICULAR TRANSFORMATIONIn discussing best practices in undergraduate research, Rowlett, et al.,60 recommend a research-supportive curriculum, noting that the curriculum in any field should impart research-related skills that will be transferable to other contexts. These authors recommend advanced independent or mentored research and point out that integrating research into the curriculum itself is critical. Reform to bring the research process into the curriculum has been managed elsewhere; Healey and Jenkins61 give numerous examples of research being successfully integrated into curricula in a diverse array of departments in universities in both the US and the UK.

Healey, et al.,61, 62 classify courses into a taxonomy with two dimensions; one axis deals with content v. methods, while the other deals with passive instruction v. active student involvement. The latter axis is of importance for LSU Discover. While Healey and Jenkins61 acknowledge a place for curricula in each of the four cells in their taxonomy, they underscore the benefit of students’ involvement in active learning strategies that simulate real-world instances of the basic research process. This section documents (1) how the interventions in curricular reform described in LSU Discover increase the number of courses of this latter type that are available to LSU students and (2) how student-learning gains in these interventions are determined.

33

VI.2.1 Need for Transformed CurriculaThrough alignment of research concepts that constitute LSU Discover SLOs with learning objectives of existing courses or sequences of courses, the QEP transforms aspects of the undergraduate culture at the university. Integrating these concepts with simultaneously infused active research strategies is transformative for students. They necessarily become more engaged in their learning and consequently more capable of performing the tasks expected of them in the formal workforce arenas that they will be entering upon graduation. Students are exposed to research within their major fields of study through curricular transformation. The curricular changes not only impact a substantial number of students in the context of their majors, but also provide a feeder mechanism for an increase in individual mentored research at LSU. It is projected that, over the five-year period of LSU Discover, about seven to nine integrated curricular changes will have been made, while four to 10 individual courses will become research enhanced.

Interested faculty, programs, and departments may apply for curriculum development grants to support this endeavor. The goal is for the addition of curricula or courses annually such that the cumulative changes across the life of the QEP will impact more than 15 academic departments (about 20%) and thus broadly transform the undergraduate research culture at LSU.

VI.2.2 Formal Structure for Curricular Transformation Three types of curricular revision are targeted: (1) development of a multi-semester research curriculum, (2) development or revision of research-based courses, and (3) development or revision of content-based courses. The following sections describe how assessment of these activities will be integrated into the implementation of each sequence or course. The departments associated with each award described herein are required to work closely with the LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) introduced in Section X.

VI.2.2.1 Multi-Semester Research CurriculumThe most aggressive, most costly, and highest priority curricular transformation involves introducing research into an integrated multi-semester curriculum within a degree program. This type of curricular revision gives a student within a particular discipline an integrated research experience across multiple courses, as well as the opportunity to participate in mentored independent research. This sequence will be at least three semesters long and must include, at a minimum, two courses and one independent study or capstone experience.

Of the two courses in a revised integrated research curriculum, one will target SLO1: Identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information or literature sources associated with a research project. To address this outcome, the adapted course design involves a content-specific librarian working with the course instructor. This class also should expose students to the various types of research (i.e., the breadth) that the discipline covers. Possible pairings with mentors for more individual research projects in future semesters can also be explored through determination of various faculty members’ areas of expertise.

This first course, or another course that must be adapted to address the criteria for an integrated multi-semester curriculum, covers SLO4: Identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question. This aspect of the course may be addressed through group work, or it may be aimed at helping the student actually formulate a research question that she or he will then later explore in a mentored independent study.


34


Table VI.B.1: Examples of Revised Integrated Curriculum within a Field of StudySLO(s) Activity Example

1 Have researchers in the field make class presentations about their work to expose students to the breadth of the field.

Faculty members in civil engineering make short presentations to the class about their research field.

1 Have individual students explore a particular aspect of the field through reading, summarizing, and critiquing primary literature.

An individual civil engineering student explores the literature for how different types of materials used for windows stand up to extreme weather conditions (e.g., hurricanes).

1 Content specific librarians make multiple presentations about relevant databases.

The librarian assigned to civil engineering goes over Web of Science, and various engineering databases.

1-4 Guided inquiry is developed via research deconstruction.

Students read, break down, and debate issues in a defined current publication on testing bridges for safety.

2, 4 Students learn methods in an inquiry-based context.

Students design and test their own designs for a hurricane resistant house.

1, 5 Students attend research fairs or presentations in their fields.

Students in civil engineering visit the undergraduate research forum as a class, accompanied by their instructor, and evaluate the speakers and posters for aspects of professional presentation.

1-5 Students present at research fairs or conferences in their fields

A student presents her poster of her independent research project in civil engineering at the LSU Discover undergraduate research symposium.

Finally, the department developing a multi-semester research curriculum either develops a new research methods course or infuses comparable information into an existing course to incorporate SLO2: Utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data and apply the results to the solution of the research problem and SLO3: Demonstrate awareness of the responsible conduct of research.The multi-semester research curriculum also includes an opportunity for mentored independent research. This independent research, which may performed individually or in groups, occurs in the context of either an independent study course or a capstone course. Through this experience students continue further development of SLOs 1, 2, 3, and 4 that began in the two transformed courses. In addition, students develop final research projects (e.g., honors theses, conference presentations, posters, capstone projects) that involve presenting their work in public venues, including the LSU Discover Research Day. Through these presentation moments, students demonstrate their level of attainment of SLO5: Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance, or oral presentation. Note that within the integrated research curriculum all five SLOs are covered, most of them multiple times.Transformed courses in a multi-semester research curriculum must include at least one assignment through which the student produces an artifact that lends itself to evaluation of the student’s level of attainment of each LSU Discover outcome treated in the course. A course proposal for this category of curricular transformation requires demonstration of course designs that include a triangulated alignment among these LSU Discover assessment-related assignments, the specific learning objectives for the course, and the LSU Discover SLOs. Through the individual DRF described in Section IV.3, the student will upload each artifact to the appropriate section in the LSU Discover Primary DRF for formative rubric evaluation by the assessment committee. Secondarily, the committee will triangulate annually the results of this assessment with the evaluation of the teaching faculty in the transformed program who assess, in aggregate, participating students’ levels of attainment in each revised course and document the interpreted results in specific sections of the TaskStream Degree Program Assessment Template as part of required annual assessment reporting for the degree program. A summative layer of assessment occurs for SLO5-communication as students participating in a revised multi-semester research curriculum formally arrange and present the results of their undergraduate research experience during Research Day, as described in Section IV.5.

35

VI.2.2.2 Research Methods Courses: Developing a new course or introducing a more active student-learning approach to research in existing research methods coursesAn examination of the general catalog at LSU shows 59 research methods courses available in departments spanning much of the university. At least some of these courses use inquiry-based or student-driven learning, in which the teacher does not dictate the assignments but, rather, guides the learner through the research process. LSU Discover will increase the number of such inquiry-based, hands-on research methods courses.The emphasis in a revised research methods course will be on active involvement of the students in formulating and testing a research question and should include incorporation of ethics training in an active learning context. Newly developed or revised research methods courses must have at least one substantial assignment targeting SLO4: Identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question and one targeting SLO2: Utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data and apply the results to the solution of the research problem. The research question used in this context may be either a question students derive themselves or an open-ended or real-world question to which the answer is not yet known. Finally, a revised research methods course must also address SLO3: Demonstrate awareness of the responsible conduct of research. The course must include at least one assignment in which each of these SLOs is validly and reliably assessed by teaching faculty. The course proposal must describe this assignment and the associated valid and reliable method of assessment of students’ aggregate level of attainment of the outcome (i.e., assessing not the attainment of individual students but, rather, of the students in aggregate). A commitment to use the results of assessment to change teaching strategies also should be indicated. Finally, the faculty must document the interpreted results in specific sections of the TaskStream Degree Program Assessment Template as part of required annual assessment reporting for the degree program. The LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) will access the results in TaskStream for inclusion in the ongoing evaluation and interpretation of the effectiveness of this component of the QEP.

Table VI.B.2: Examples of Revised Research Methods CourseSLO Activity Example

2 Encourage the use of real world problems without known outcomes

Students in a botany course take pollen samples from a site across time and weather conditions and look for patterns in the data.

2 Have students in different lab sections work on different aspects of the same problem

Different sections of a biology lab course examine the effect of a biotoxin on longevity, eating, mating behaviors, or reproductive outcomes.

2 Analyze data from real world publicly available data set Students in a political science class examine exit polls for relations between demographic variables and voting behavior.

3 Learn the regulations of dealing with human subjects Students in a psychology class take the NIH mandated on-line ethics training about human subjects.

3 Examine aspects of unethical behavior in the history of the field, and discuss what safeguards have been and can be put into place to prevent in the future

Students in a biology class learn about Steven Eaton, who went to prison for faking data in a cancer clinical trial.

4 Have students formulate their research questions based on their own observations or experiences

Students in a nutrition class wonder if students will learn better if they’ve had a breakfast high in protein or one high in carbohydrates.


36


VI.2.2.3 Content-Based CoursesEmphasis in the content-based courses is on introducing the idea of research and the creation of new knowledge into the classroom, as well as the scaffolding of critical evaluation skills.

Newly developed or revised courses emphasizing undergraduate research must have at least one substantial assignment targeting SLO1: Identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information or literature sources associated with a research project. In addition, at least one other SLO must be targeted by an assignment in the course; however, faculty may propose the other SLO that the course will address. The required learning outcomes assessment for this type of innovation tracks the process described for research methods courses in Section VI.2.2.2. The course must include at least one assignment for each of the SLOs in which the outcome is validly and reliably assessed by teaching faculty. The course proposal must describe this assignment and the associated valid and reliable method of assessment of students’ aggregate level of attainment of the outcome. A commitment to use the results of assessment to change teaching strategies must be demonstrated. Finally, the faculty must document the interpreted results in specific sections of the TaskStream Degree Program Assessment Template as part of required annual assessment reporting for the degree program. The LSU Discover assessment committee will access the results in TaskStream for inclusion in the ongoing evaluation and interpretation of the effectiveness of this component of the QEP.

Table VI.B.3: Examples of Revised Content CourseSLOs Activity Example

1 Have researchers in the field make class presentations about their work.

A researcher in schizophrenia makes a presentation about his work on flat affect to an abnormal psychology class

1 Have librarians make presentations about how to find relevant academic sources in the field.

A librarian shows students in educational psychology how to do a literature search on pedagogical methods using PsycInfo

1, 3 Compare the portrayal of a problem in the popular media to that in the scholarly literature.

Students in a Counseling Psychology class look at recommendations for post-divorce counseling in magazines vs. a primary literature empirical article.

1 Find, read, summarize, and critique a piece of primary literature relevant to a class topic.

Students in a Social Psychology class must articulate the experimental design of Asch’s Conformity experiment, offer alternative explanations, and proposed further experiments to refine the hypothesis

VI.2.2.4 Proposal Format for Curricular TransformationProposals for a multi-semester research curriculum transformation must fully describe the fundamental components of the transformed curriculum as delineated in Section VI.2.3.7. Similarly, proposals to revise courses must articulate which SLOs the course will address and how and must have at least one substantial assignment that produces a documentable outcome which can be accessed by rubric analysis for each SLO, along with an associated valid and reliable method for assessing student achievement, including description of strategies for assessment implementation and reporting. Modifications to an existing course must include the current syllabus of the course and an example of the new syllabus that might result from the modification. Calls for proposals will be issued each fall, and in the following spring the College Advisory Board (Appendix J), with at least one member of the LSU Discovery assessment committee (Appendix E), will evaluate course proposals and award funding to the top proposals. Criteria for awarding funding will include how well the SLOs are addressed, the innovation and likelihood that the assignments will improve student learning, the degree to which the course(s) and curriculum are altered substantively in the direction of LSU Discover SLOs, the number of students affected, the effectiveness of the assessment methods, and the likelihood that the transformation will become a fundamental component of teaching and learning in the curriculum. Year one includes funding for continuation of the existing

37

pilot programs, and funding for new proposals will be implemented over the remaining years of LSU Discover. Integrated curricular changes (capped at $40,000) will be favored over those for individual courses (capped at $5,000).

Calls for proposals will be announced via an e-mail to LSU faculty, and information is available on a Website that includes explicit instructions and examples of the kind of transformative curricula LSU Discover promotes. If proposals in the first round are not indicative of the expected level of quality for an effectively transformed curriculum, workshops will be conducted for interested faculty. The committee will decide on the grants in the spring semester and award them on July 1 of that year, to be used during the next fiscal year.

Funding may be used for initial course/curriculum development, for non-recurring expenses for supplies, and for the initial implementation of the course. After the first offering of the revised course, the department or college must agree via chair’s and dean’s signatures to assume any recurring expenses. The department or college, again via chair’s and dean’s signatures, also must commit to continuing the course/curriculum in its modified form. Departments will receive the initial 50% of funding as the course is developed, with the remainder funded after the results of assessment of SLOs in the first offering of the course are reported. The latter should be completed within three months after the initial offering of the modified course/curriculum has ended.

VI.2.2.5 B.S. in Coastal Environmental Science (CES) PilotOf the two ongoing pilots of this type of curricular revision, the B.S. in Coastal Environmental Science (CES) pilot initiates students into a progressive multi-semester research curriculum through an introductory first-year course.

Six incoming first-year students who were recruited for this pilot enrolled in Environmental Science (ENVS) 1127 Introduction to Environmental Sciences Honors (3 hours) for fall 2013, each of whom is a declared CES major, has less than 24 hours of college credit (including AP or, dual enrollment), has an ACT score above 25, and a high school GPA above 3.50.

ENVS 1127 stands as the students’ first course and formal introduction to undergraduate research. ENVS 1127 is a research-intensive course designed to teach students the scientific method and critical thinking. ENVS 1127 also requires students to choose and develop an independent research project. The first assignment for this project is to write a brief research project proposal, describing the topic chosen, why this topic is important, and a plan of work. This proposal is due in mid-September. Late in the semester, each student prepares and presents a 10-minute platform talk that is presented to the teaching assistant and at least one peer as a practice presentation review prior to making a class presentation to the entire class. After they receive feedback on their work, the students will finalize their written research project reports. Students are required to provide proper citations and references for any and all information obtained from documented sources, graphs, figures, and pictures used in their PowerPoint presentations and in their written works.

In addition to these course assignments, student participants in the LSU Discover School of the Coast & Environment (SC&E)/ CES Undergraduate Research Program develop a research prospectus by the end of the first semester. This research prospectus ideally is an extension of the ENVS 1127 research proposal. Although the primary assessment of LSU Discover outcomes pertains to SLO1-literacy and SLO3-ethics, the coverage of material and the assignments in ENVS 1127 make possible assessment of students’ levels of attainment for each of the five outcomes.


38


Table VI.B.4: Activities from ENVS 1127 PilotPotential SLO Activity Example

1 Have individual students explore a particular aspect of the field through reading, summarizing and critiquing primary literature

Individuals in ENVS 1127 write a research prospectus on a topic of their choosing

3 Ethics training Students demonstrate the proper way to cite sources in their research project paper

The formal mentoring process occurs in the sophomore year, when participating SC&E undergraduate researchers are placed in a faculty member’s research group. The expectation is that most of these students will continue to do undergraduate research throughout their undergraduate careers. SC&E has established an undergraduate research contract that requires students to set goals and document their progress and the results of their research efforts. This documentation occurs through a system of integrated LSU Discover electronic folios.

During their junior year, mentored students earn two hours or more of university credit in ENVS/OCS (Oceanography and Coastal Science) 3999 for undergraduate research activities performed under the direction of a faculty member. During the spring semester, these students prepare and present the results of their research at the campus-wide LSU Discover Research Day.

During their senior year, SC&E mentored students enroll in ENVS/OCS 4999, the capstone course for the B.S. in CES. Designated through the Communication across the Curriculum (CxC) program as “communication-intensive,” this course requires students to prepare a 10-minute PowerPoint talk (CxC—Technical & Spoken Communication), a poster (CxC—Visual Communication), and a written report (CxC—Written Communication) on their research. Formal communication of their research experiences and findings occurs at two separate on-campus events—(1) Research Day and (2) the SC&E symposium, at which all students in ENVS/OCS 4999 present posters of their work in a format that includes an evaluation panel of experts from local industry and from state and federal agencies. In this course, LSU Discover SC&E participants’ level of attainment of all five SLOs is assessed through the electronic folio assessment system as generally described in Section IV.3.

VI.2.3.6 Bachelor of Architecture PilotIn spring 2013, the School of Architecture embarked upon a pilot program to explore how the faculty could better incorporate research experiences into the baccalaureate degree. A multi-semester, curricular approach was designed, with the goal of at least 10 students graduating each year with this enriched research experience.

The outline of the program over multiple semesters begins in the third year of the five-year professional baccalaureate degree program. The third year is the first year that students are fully integrated into the architectural degree program. The research program includes the following coursework:• ARCH 4700 Research Methods – an introductory course for undergraduate students (SLO1, 4)• Up to nine hours of professional electives that provide content for the research trajectory begun in

ARCH 4700 (SLO2, partial; SLO5)• ARCH 5002 Research Studio – the research question becomes an architectural project bringing

together the research conducted in previous semesters to a design problem (SLO1-5).

39

Table VI.B.5: Activities from ARCH 4700 PilotPotential SLO Activity Example

1 Introduce students to resources available in the institution The Art & Design librarian prepares special tours for the students with detailed and specific resources identified

1 Have individual students explore a particular aspect of the field through reading, summarizing and critiquing primary literature

An individual Architecture student explores the literature for how different types of materials used for windows effects energy consumption

The history of research in the discipline of architecture includes scholarly text-based work, scientific materials-based research, and design-focused research. Through a series of courses, including a research methods course and a final cumulative project, the students identify a problem, investigate the issue over multiple semesters, and synthesize the work through a final design project.

The first iteration of the pilot that was conducted in spring 2013 had the following conditions:• A group of nine third-year architecture students, out of a class of 32, were selected to participate. • LSU Libraries staff heavily supported the course. • The course used an e-portfolio system provided through TaskStream. • By the end of the semester the students had created an annotated bibliography and formulated a

research question. • The dispositional critical thinking ability of the entire cohort of third-year architecture students was

tested at the beginning and end of the course using the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory. Results showed that the cohort participating in LSU Discover and the other students were equivalent in their sub-categories of critical thinking disposition measured by the test and that no change occurred in this measure over the course of the class.

• Similarly, to see if one semester of study in the pilot course may have an effect on students’ cognitive thinking abilities, the California Critical Thinking Skills test was administered to both groups. While the Discover cohort scored higher than the other students on the skills test, both before and after the course, no significant increase in skills was shown over the course of the semester in either group.

At the conclusion of the course, members of the architecture faculty discussed the results and processes of the course, with the finding that the online work with TaskStream was somewhat cumbersome and that training for both faculty and students would be needed to optimize the use of this tool. The library support, on the other hand, was extremely beneficial and added to the depth of learning in SLO1-literacy. The bibliographies of the students reflect the impact of this support, as they are substantive and complete. Finally, experimentation with the commercial critical thinking instruments suggests that the relative value of using them in relation to other variables (e.g., student time and cost) is insufficient to include them in the process.

The first cohort of students is now engaged in phase two of the School of Architecture pilot on a curricular transformation emphasizing undergraduate research. Beginning in spring semester 2014, the school will offer the students a one-credit, independent study course, that will allow professors to create a structure wherein the students create written summaries of the work they are doing in other classes, add to their annotated bibliographies, and move the research question forward into a project proposal for phase three in fall 2014. In spring 2015, the faculty will attempt to incorporate the work of the fall into student publication from the School of Architecture, Contexture, as well as seek publication in the national student journal, CRIT, and other venues. In addition, architecture students will participate in LSU Research Day.


40


One significant aspect of the pilot that needs improving is the faculty development component. While faculty may include students into their research projects in an apprenticeship model, the aim is for faculty to aid students in building their own research projects. As a first step, both pilots will be broadly assessed to refine the programs.

VI.2.3.7 Assessment in Curricular TransformationAssessment of the success of curricular transformation primarily involves determination of the level of student achievement of the learning outcomes. Assessment of individual SLOs within each revised curriculum or course is done within each course, as described in course proposals that are approved for funding and implementation. Each funded stand-alone course and any revised courses in funded curricular programs are assessed for SLOs specified in the approved curricular transformation application. Curricular programs are assessed in terms of advances in student learning of all five SLOs, using student-produced documents archived over progressive years in the LSU Discover Primary DRF. Students will be responsible for uploading documents to this folio with guidance and instructions from the LSU Discover coordinator and from faculty (see Section X) To facilitate both determination of student achievement and the improvement in student learning that is characteristic of this folio-based assessment, the budget funds TaskStream licenses for student participants and training and the rubric-based evaluation of student learning. Training curricular transformation faculty participants in the use of rubrics and assessment procedures is available from the LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) with support from the LSU Office of Assessment and Evaluation.

The several quantitative methods for monitoring success of these activities include the following: (1) number of integrated curricular changes effected; (2) number of students in integrated curricula; (3) number of stand-alone courses affected; (4) number of students in transformed stand-alone courses; and (5) frequency with which the revised courses are offered.

The innovative, transformative manner in which LSU Discover implements discipline-specific research enhancements in courses and sequences of courses corresponds to the overarching LSU Discover goal of enhancing multi-semester research experiences that align with the prescribed SLOs. The strong ties to large numbers of departments and the continuous feedback, through surveys and interviews, from leadership of the 12 major research-active colleges accentuate its impact and strengthen its sustainability.

VI.3 MENTORED UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH

VI.3.1 Overview of UG Research Efforts at LSU and Need for this ActivityDespite the steady growth of mentored undergraduate research opportunities at LSU, these opportunities have never been promoted among all students. Rather, they tend to have been limited to grant-driven niches in a handful of disciplines or to merit-based programs available to an select few. For example, 87 students graduated from the Honors College in spring 2012, with 58 of these completing an honors thesis, comprising 2.2% and 1.5%, respectively, of the graduating class. Thus, the prospect for involving more students in mentored undergraduate research is significant.

41

In addressing the following factors, LSU Discover contributes to greater campus-wide undergraduate research participation:

1. Preparation for research: Students acquire early (first-year) and broad-based preparation for research.

2. Research entry points in the undergraduate curriculum: Faculty, departments, and LSU Discover work together to identify and recruit interested students, thus reinforcing multi-semester development of learning outcomes.

3. Validation at the university level: LSU Discover activities increase student recognition opportunities.

4. Identification of Mentors: Students are assisted in identifying “individual” faculty mentors in an environment where the student-to-faculty ratio is greater than 10-to-1.

This section of the plan concerns the manner in which LSU Discover enhances and extends campus-wide, mentored undergraduate research through alignment of new and existing efforts with the prescribed SLOs.

VI.3.2 LSU Discover Format for Mentored Undergraduate Research

VI.3.2.1 General Pedagogy of Faculty MentoringLSU Discover defines a mentor as a faculty member who works closely with and teaches a student mentee about an agreed-upon research topic, typically in the area of scholarship of the faculty mentor and always with a goal of generating new knowledge. Mentored undergraduates who participate in LSU Discover work directly with faculty mentors on research-for-credit related to their professional interests. This research integrates, where possible, with formal coursework and prepares students for subsequent effective integration of off-campus research experiences. Most instances of mentored research involve the student learning the principles and practices of effective academic research by becoming involved in the mentor’s in-process, real-world research in an area or subject related to the student’s career interests. Students work between 10-20 hours per week on their multi-semester project in the context of their other courses, generally through a research-for-credit mechanism.

Faculty mentoring of undergraduates complements classroom instruction, workshops, and seminars, and offers students the benefits of direct and sustained student-faculty interaction. A characteristic of most mentor-mentee, multiple-semester experiences is that the undergraduate student transitions over time from a primarily dependent-based orientation towards independent scholarship. Literature on mentored research convincingly makes the case that students feel that one of the better ways of improving an undergraduate research program is through hands-on work with a faculty mentor.22

The Office of Undergraduate Research (OUR) recruits faculty mentors as an ongoing initiative and maintains a campus-wide database of faculty members (see section VI.3.2.4). Each student may be placed with a faculty mentor by the OUR on the basis of the student’s individual skill set and interest and additional salient factors such family obligations or the need for work-study. Some students use online tools maintained by the research office to identify faculty research interests. More generally, students self-select an LSU mentor by the process that suits them best.


42


VI.3.2.2 General Institutional Structure of Mentored ResearchA primary goal of LSU Discover is to create highly favorable campus conditions and broad opportunities for students to participate in formal undergraduate research. Students will enter mentored research through the institutional, administrative process housed in the OUR, and they will come to the process in various ways. Some may enter LSU with a fully formed intent to seek opportunities for guided research experiences. Many with high potential for effective participation in such opportunities, however, will come to campus unaware of either their potential or a concomitant natural interest in research. Such events as the workshops described in Section VI.1.3 and attendance at Research Day (Section VI.4) will reinforce the positive influence of other experiences, such as an inspiring professor or interest peaked through a curricular sequence such as those described in Section VI.3.2.

Mentorships should start as early in a student’s curriculum as possible to allow for multiple semesters and/or summers of research. For most students, mentored research necessarily is limited to two or three semesters and/or summers, but some may participate in multiple years of formal mentoring and focused work on a carefully articulated research problem. Research-for-credit options will be 1-3 credits per semester, depending on the number of credit hours for which a student is registered in a given semester. The process defines a research-for-credit course as one in which students are trained and encouraged to generate new knowledge or publication-quality results in their discipline. As defined in this manner, the interplay of mentoring and research-for-credit will increase the number of students who (1) obtain summer research experience, (2) complete multiple semesters of research, (3) work with mentors to publish/present research, and (4) achieve thesis/capstone recognition on transcripts. As described in Section IV.3, in response to formal prompts, students participating in mentored research selectively document the evolution of their attainment of the LSU Discover learning outcomes by uploading coursework and other products to a digital response folio carefully designed for this purpose. Additionally, as part of the development of their ability to communicate the results of their research (SLO5-communication), these students are encouraged to develop a “digital research self” (DRS), or personal representation of themselves in light of their work as an undergraduate researcher. In this manner, the DRS functions as one of several triangulated assessments through which a student’s achievement of LSU Discover SLOs is evaluated. More generally, as described in Section IV.3, a commercial DRF product (TaskStream’s LAT) functions as the receptacle of a student’s work, the platform for development of the DRS, and the means through which the LSU Discovery assessment committee (Appendix E) undertakes rubric-based reviews of a student’s work and aggregation of students’ scores.

VI.3.2.3 Participating Student CohortsThe student cohorts in LSU Discover derive from four groups that collectively span much of LSU’s undergraduate student population. As noted in Section VI.1, LSU Discover works with the Office of the LSU Registrar to optimize a procedure by which the records of students participating in mentored research are associated with the QEP. Via this identifier, student demographics can be used in the interpretation of data associated with the SLOs. Approximately 50 students per year will enter as Chancellor’s Future Leaders in Research (CFLR). This group is composed of high-achieving (ACT >30) incoming first-year students who are offered four-year research experiences and institutional assistance. These students are matched with a faculty mentor on the basis of their résumés and their stated research preferences. These students become involved in multi-semester research projects, although the limitations on their funding restrict the program to fall and spring semesters only. A second group is drawn from the university’s Chancellor’s Student Aide program. These students, also high performing, are offered four-year placement at approximately 15 hours per week in units across

43

campus, with many being assigned to repetitive office tasks. LSU Discover will initially transform 15 of these to a Chancellor’s Research designation and grow this number to 50 new students per year. This strategy provides entry into QEP activities for students who become interested in research. In 2013, 578 new Chancellor’s Student Aide positions existed at LSU, and LSU Discover targets less than 10% of this group to minimize disruption of student work on campus. A third cohort is developed by recruiting students enrolled in research-for-credit courses at LSU. We anticipate that this group will start at 15 students and grow to 50 per year over the course of five years, naturally spreading the impact of the program over a variety of different departments campus-wide. The fourth and final cohort of students is drawn from students within the “research-enabled” curricular sequences, introduced in Section VI.3.2, who start and continue in research-for-credit courses. Figure VI.A illustrates that the overall mentored research component is expected to start at 70 students in year one and grow to 420 in the five initial years of LSU Discover. The last two cohorts, however, introduce a scalable factor into the program such that it could grow (or contract), depending upon the mentor pool and other resources.

It should also be noted that the eventual majority of participants, the last two cohorts previously defined, is not pre-selected by high school standardized test performance, thus contributing to the goal of making participation accessible to a broad and diverse group of students. The second-through-fourth cohorts will be recruited partly through the co-curricular efforts, including LSU’s First Year Experience program and residential colleges as described in Section VI.3.1. Of these four cohorts, the first will be recruited by LSU’s Office of Financial Aid and Scholarships in an ongoing process through which information about the QEP is broadly disseminated both to applicants to LSU and to other recruitment contacts. LSU Discover also takes a broad approach to recruiting students for the other three cohorts. Students are recruited via courses that are “research enabled,” as described in Section VI.3.2, and through e-mail solicitations of students participating in the Chancellor’s Student Aid program, in research-for-credit, and in work-study programs at LSU. In addition, the OUR contacts all faculty members on the LSU mentor list once per semester by e-mail. An overarching recruiting goal is to elicit broad interest through each of the methods previously

FIGURE VI.A: Anticipated Number of Mentored Students in LSU Discover Per Year.*

*EnrollmentfortheCFLRandChancellor’sResearch(funded)categorieswillstabilizeinyearfive,whereasparticipationintheresearchfor credit and curricular transformation are scalable.

0 100 200 300 400 500

CFLR

Research for Credit

Chancellor's Research

Curriculum

QEP Year 5

QEP Year 4

QEP Year 3

QEP Year 2

QEP Year 1

Number of Students

15

10

25

45

60

40

65

105

130

10

35

70

105

130

25

65

105

165

190


44


delineated. Importantly, an oversight responsibility of the College Advisory Board (Appendix J) is to support the OUR in finding practical strategies for ensuring that mentored research activities do not have negative effects on participating students’ academic performance.

VI.3.2.4 Unifying the On-Campus Mentor PoolAs a level VI SACSCOC institution, LSU has significant numbers of research-active faculty who arrange formal opportunities for undergraduates to work directly with them in their own research and/or in the context of research courses, such as senior design courses. As the largest campus-wide program that provides multi-semester, one-on-one faculty mentoring as defined previously, the CFLR program solicits nominations of faculty mentors by departmental chairs on a yearly basis. This effort has resulted in the compilation of a database of 225 research-active faculty campus-wide over the period 2009-2013. Of these, 85% mentored CFLR students or students in one of the other research programs on campus, but all were nominated by departmental chairs specifically in the context of mentoring young undergraduates. More than 10 other programs with more specialized foci have independently developed faculty mentor lists at LSU, although to this point no institution-wide effort to unify the mentor pool, to recognize mentors, or to help develop mentoring skills for faculty has occurred. In developing the plans for LSU Discover, the planners made the first major attempt to develop a comprehensive faculty mentor database and identified more than 420 potential mentors on campus. Most of these faculty members have mentored students within their research groups in the context of one or more of LSU’s undergraduate research programs. The database shows that some members of the LSU faculty have mentored multiple students with obvious successes, such as production of multiple undergraduate coauthored publications and prestigious student awards. Other faculty members have mentored across several different programs. The latter two groups form an initial source from which to recruit volunteers for workshops, online tutorials, and other resources introduced in previous sections and in Section VI.3.3, which follows. Assuming an aggregate average of two undergraduate students in each participating faculty member’s research group for a period of four semesters, the data indicates that LSU’s institutional capacity to place new students in mentored undergraduate research experiences is in excess of 420 new students per year once a formal approach to undergraduate research has become institutionalized.

FIGURE VI.B: Majors Per Tenure-Track Faculty Member by Selected LSU Academic Departments

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Coast and EnvironmentForeign Languages and Literature

ChemistryMathematicsArchitecture

ArtHistory

ManagementBiological Sciences

Communication Sciences and DisordersPetroleum Engineering

Kinesiology 51.38

41.58

33.2919.58

16.3611.33

10.29

6.073.182.94

1.920.98

45

Figure VI.B is based on 2012 data and reveals initial insights into institutional capacity and need regarding mentored undergraduate research. While overall institutional capacity is comfortably greater than the sum of the initial student cohorts introduced in Section VI.3.2.3, many disciplines at LSU would not have an easy route to serve, through their faculty alone, significant fractions of their majors if the number of requests for mentored research grows significantly. For example, with 42 undergraduate majors per faculty member (tenure track) in 2012, LSU’s petroleum engineering department would be challenged to provide multi-semester mentoring of individual research projects for even 10% of its students, yet this academic discipline is a major workforce need of Louisiana.

VI.3.2.5 Off-Campus Research Experiences and Potential Research Experiences in Area IndustriesA distinctive feature of LSU is the proximity of a massive array of potential private sector, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), local and federal government partners whose business activities and expertise can be complementary to students’ achievement of the LSU Discover SLOs. Within the petrochemical sector alone, some 200 industrial sites are located between Baton Rouge and New Orleans (a distance of only 80 miles). As a Level VI institution, LSU has a significant number of potential faculty mentors involved with off-campus experts in a constantly evolving suite of collaborative research and scholarly activities. These relationships offer some students opportunities for deeper and more extensive learning through a project that integrates the academic and real-world aspects of a complex research problem. Students participating in LSU Discover are invited to work with their LSU mentors to identify an “aspirational off-campus” co-mentor to complement the mentoring provided in the on-campus relationship. This teaching strategy matches off-campus mentor expertise to a student’s research interests as approved by the student’s LSU mentor, with whose interests those of the off-campus mentor in some manner will align. Off-campus research will not be required and will not always be possible, but when feasible, it more generally will occur during the summer and after at least one semester of on-campus research. While not a requirement for all students, on-site research experiences strengthen SLOs by involving students in practical, real-world research. These triangular research projects buttress the university’s relationship with off-campus entities in the realms of business and industry in a manner that not only mirrors for students the role of such synergies in the creation of new knowledge, but actually makes students participants in the process.

VI.3.2.6 Pilot of Mentored ResearchIn fall 2013, the OUR piloted a small, mentored research project. In this pilot, every incoming first-year CFLR awardee (N=38) was contacted by e-mail during the first week of classes. The goal was to recruit two students, and two quickly responded, so no further contact was attempted. The first two students and corresponding mentors were contacted and agreed to participate, although one student had to drop out due to conflicting academic constraints, so only one ultimately participated. The pilot student performed the activities introduced in Section IV and described in Table VI.C.1, and used a TaskStream DRF (the example in Section IV is from this student). The process suggested that students will navigate the DRF system with ease and that mentors most likely will readily support their students’ participation in these activities.

VI.3.2.7 Assessment of SLOs in LSU Discover Mentored ResearchThe most direct and general evaluation of the extent to which LSU Discover supports students’ achievement of the SLOs occurs through electronic, rubric-based assessments of the tagged coursework as described in Section IV. For instance, in the first semester a student might be given this prompt as part of the research-for-credit course: “In 150-250 words, relate what you know about documenting the literature in your research area.” The schedules generally charted


46


herein by semester of participation indicate the manner in which this evaluation process evolves. Although resources allow only for summative assessments of representative samples of the cohort in semesters two and later, LSU Discover includes a formative assessment of each student at two points. After the first semester, evaluators analyze SLOs 1-literacy and 3-ethics and provide formative feedback to both student and mentor. SLOs 4-idea and 5-communication are assessed in the terminal semester, with the findings reported to mentors for formative use.

VI.3.2.8 Academic Credit and TrackingBecause the cohorts of mentored students introduced previously will be performing their research broadly across the LSU campus, it is important for the LSU Discover leadership to track students and assess learning outcome gains over a multi-semester period and concurrently be unobtrusive to faculty mentors. Research-for-credit classes support this process. A survey of LSU academic department chairs (Appendix K) identified 128 research-for-credit courses associated with departments that span much of the university, but it is not clear that all of these courses involve research as described in Section VI.3.3, and the corresponding enrollments are modest. For example, the total enrollment in all research-for-credit courses in 2011 was 2121 students, or 7 % of the student body. LSU Discover promotes the value of participating in such courses and facilitates options for students.

The Honors College has piloted a special section of HNRS 3500 to allow students in the college otherwise unable to sign up via their home departments to have a route to research for credit, though it will only be used in a small number of cases because of the large variety of department-based courses. In an analogous manner, LSU Discover is collaborating with the university registrar to implement a zero-credit course and credit-bearing courses under the university-wide UNIV rubric to accommodate and track students unable to sign up for a credit-bearing course through their home department. The expectation of students is that they agree to submit in electronic format a standard set of assignments for rubric-based assessment, and in turn, they will be enrolled in LSU Discover. The assignments will provide a framework for assessing the multi-semester experience. Research for credit courses will give students a means, via their transcripts, to document multi-semester research experience and enhance their professional development. The courses will also facilitate communication of learning expectations to faculty mentors as well as to students.

Many departments have developed protocols to recognize one or more research for credit courses as part of their majors; others may opt to do so in the context of their application to the curricular transformation activities of Section VI.2. Because most departments have an internal system of centralizing a faculty of record for the administration of research courses, the administrative work to individual mentors can be minimized so that they can focus on the research with their students. To aid in obtaining comparable data, cohorts will be organized by the number of semesters of involvement in research. This arrangement allows for unifying SLO assessment that builds to a cumulative summative assessment of SLOs 1-5 in the terminal semester. Research-for-credit facilitates other common programming across the mentored research experience. As such, every student uploads half-page reflective statements to the DRF at the beginning of each semester, as well as regular half-page research progress summaries of their participation in co-curricular activities and of the creative/research elements that are distinctive to each of their projects, thus adding to the developing professional “digital self” introduced previously.

47

Table VI.C.1: SLOs, First Semester of Mentored Undergraduate Research

SLO Planned Learning Experience/Activities Content for Assessment Competencies Outcomes/Findings Person

Responsible

1 Mentors introduce student to reading scholarly literature in their area

Twice per semester; guided essays in DRF include literature citations and analysis

Students develop understanding of literature in their area

Development of a literature database for eventual capstone project

Mentor/R Duran

3 Research ethics training CITI or NIH certificate Responsible research conduct

Mentor/R Duran

Table VI.C.2: SLOs, Second and Subsequent Semesters of Mentored Undergraduate Research

SLO Planned Learning Experience/Activities Content for Assessment Competencies Outcomes/Findings Person

Responsible

1 Students read scholarly literature in their areas

Biweekly reports in DRF include literature analysis

Students will develop understanding of literature in their areas

Development of a literature database for eventual capstone project

Mentor/R Duran

2 Students learn a method or analysis technique

Guided prompt in DRF Research method development in their areas

Research skills compilation in CV or digital self

Mentor/R Duran

Table VI.C.3: SLOs, Terminal Semester of Mentored Undergraduate Research

SLO Planned Learning Experience/Activities Competencies Content for Assessment

Responsible unit for Rubric analysis of student produced works/reports

Students compile and analyze scholarly literature in their areas

Ability to find and evaluate relevant literature

Exam questions, quizzes, surveys, or research reports

Mentor/Instructor//V. Wilson and B. Matthews/QEP coordinator

Students learn method or analysis technique

Demonstrate skills in collection and analysis of data/results

Assessed by student-produced lab reports, research reports, and works

(same as above)

Students learn appropriate behavior in their areas

Recognize ethical issues in research inquiry

Assessed by student-produced research reports and works; completion of ethics module

(same as above)

4 Students cite an original research idea in their areas

Identify or distinguish new research or problems within the discipline

Assessed by student-produced presentations at research day

(same as above)

5 Students communicate their own results

Scholarly and articulate communication

Assessed by student-produced presentations at Research Day

(same as above)

VI.3.3 Associated Activities for Enhancing SLOs and Incentives Participation in the annual Research Day and assistance integrating an off-campus research experience form two activities supporting a common cohort experience, but additional activities, awards, and incentives are crucial to facilitate recruiting, optimal participation of faculty mentors, and optimal learning gains. As such, upon enrollment in the program, participants in multi-semester research may compete for several additional awards that augment SLOs and reward their participation in LSU Discover. One of these awards will be a $500 travel stipend associated with the Research Day activities described in Section VI.4. The deans of many colleges at LSU have committed to adding complementary travel awards as part of Research Day to broaden participation


48


of their own students. Publication awards, awards for participation in proposals and prestigious awards applications, an annual recognition reception, and best presentation awards are several other examples of ways in which LSU Discover fosters student excellence in mentored research. Although LSU policies already allow advanced undergraduates to receive graduate-level credit on their transcripts with departmental permission, very few undergraduates enroll in graduate classes. Likewise, students can be a part of a graduate program while still an undergraduate, with an accelerated master’s degree as one example. In collaboration with the Dean of the LSU Graduate School, the LSU Discover program promotes this valuable option for advanced undergraduates.

In an analogous manner, mentor recognition, incentives, and training strengthen the culture of undergraduate research and, to the end of effective program assessment, form a critical method of encouraging participation. One program will be a $2000 mentor awards program on the basis of publication-quality and/or creative results. This program starts in year two and builds to a $4000 total by year five. Likewise, a series of up to three awards per year of $5000 each to faculty who incorporate results from undergraduates in research proposals encourages effective mentoring starting in year two. Faculty awards of $500 each to support travel with undergraduates to professional meetings start at $1,000 in year one and increase to $10,000 by year five. Starting in year one, two $1000 awards each year for faculty who most effectively mentor first-year students will establish a mechanism to recognize the early undergraduate focus of LSU Discover. Teaching credit for undergraduate mentees and research laboratory space assignments form two powerful but extremely challenging incentives at LSU. Neither of these has been solved; therefore, neither can form an institutional commitment. Nonetheless, LSU Discover will seek solutions for a way to sponsor teaching release and space assignment based on effectiveness and excellence in mentoring undergraduate researchers. Through support from the LSU Athletic Association, the 12 most research-active colleges each nominated an outstanding undergraduate researcher and her or his faculty mentor. The students were recognized as “LSU Discover Scholars,” and faculty and students participated in an on-field ceremony as a pilot during the Nov 29, 2013, LSU-Arkansas football game, with this activity to continue each year, as possible, during the annual Homecoming game.

Finally, mentor development activities form an ongoing activity within LSU Discover. One of these, annual workshops offered by Dr. William Wischusen of the LSU Department of Biological Sciences, is inspired by the highly successful “Entering Mentoring” mentor-training program designed by Jo Handlesmann and sponsored by HHMI and the National Academies. A second approach involves online mentor training workshops designed by LSU faculty who have successfully mentored across multiple undergraduate research programs, with nominations coming from the College Advisory Board. Collaborating with the LSU Faculty Technology Center and with the Office of Communications & University Relations, these faculty mentors will devise and record 60-minute, online workshops focused on best practices on mentoring undergraduates in their areas of scholarship and in the context of LSU’s distinctive environment. The workshops will allow asynchronous and very broad delivery, and an integrated evaluation/certification screen will allow LSU Discover to track faculty who use the training tool. LSU Discover will work with the College Advisory Board (Appendix J) to make two $5000 faculty awards each year that ensure the constant development of these training tools. LSU Discover also will collaborate with the colleges such that each new hire at the assistant professor level is invited to participate in both forms of mentor training.

Mentored research is a crucial activity for connecting large numbers of LSU faculty to the multiple-semester research experience that is at the core of LSU Discover. The mentored research activities will systematize and unify the heretofore disparate and grant-driven “niche” research programs in the context of enhanced student learning. Moreover, mentored research as implemented through

49

LSU Discover strongly integrates with the activities in Sections VI.1 and VI.2 as a logical next step. To summarize, mentored research is the broad context of the creativity, innovation, and scholarly development of new knowledge that generally will provide the basis of most presentations that constitute the Research Day described in the following section.

VI.4 LSU DISCOVER RESEARCH DAYStudents’ participation in LSU Discover culminates with an event in which the undergraduate researchers formally present their work, demonstrating to a heterogeneous audience of research faculty, area professionals, and members of the community the quality and substance of their work and inspiring thereby the next generation of student researchers. Research Day includes poster and oral presentations, creative performances, and “research open houses” categorized by disciplines, especially to the end of introducing younger students to on-campus research opportunities. It promotes connections between disciplines, provides a tangible means for LSU to engage the community, and offers first-year students a broad view of possible research avenues. The event serves undergraduate researchers both as an opportunity, through preparation, to improve their ability effectively to communicate the results of their research—i.e., the execution of an original work of scholarship—and as a forum, by providing a formal stage for presenting the finished projects to a sophisticated audience. It therefore serves also as a promotional and recruiting event involving large numbers of students and the community, transcending LSU Discover by broadly benefiting undergraduate and graduate student recruiting.

VI.4.1 History/Overview of Undergraduate Research presentation events at LSU and Need for this ActivityResearch Day serves three purposes: (1) the event allows students to present the culmination of their research work as developed through their courses and mentored research; (2) it serves as an open house for academic departments to showcase their own research initiatives; and (3) it generally introduces first-year and second-year students to the research activities available across campus. This event allows mature undergraduate researchers to present their work and makes fledgling student researchers aware of opportunities across campus. Furthermore, departmental research “open houses” will facilitate networking among faculty, students, and the community.

This kind of event has been shown not only to assist students in “communicating the results of their research to others” but also “serves to excite and motivate additional students and faculty to get involved in undergraduate research.” Such “campus-wide celebrations encourage cross-disciplinary sharing and learning, opening students’ and faculty members’ eyes to the creative scholarship that occurs in other disciplines”.62 For more than 10 years, the University of Georgia Center for Undergraduate Research Opportunities has held an annual symposium that attracts approximately 600 student presentations. The University of Washington Undergraduate Research Program has held the Annual UW Undergraduate Research Symposium for 16 years, with over 1000 participants in 2013. Members of the QEP implementation committee have visited both campuses to learn more about these programs and remain in contact with those offices. The aspiration is for LSU Discover to pave the way for the university to create similar opportunities for hundreds of LSU undergraduates to present research at various stages and levels, from poster sessions on junior-level work to full presentations of capstone research projects, such as theses.

The need for LSU to provide all students opportunities to present their work in a professional setting is clear. In spring 2013, the implementation committee conducted a campus-wide survey to determine campus interest in participation in Research Day. By a conservative estimate, a sufficient


50


pool of student presenters from which to draw for such a campus-wide event already exists. Of 24,000 undergraduates, approximately 400 already present research data and findings at the departmental, college, or regional/national levels. Many of these presentations appear to occur as part of capstone courses, presumably at a very high level of competency, in the respective disciplines (e.g., Honors thesis). However, only a fraction of our students have been given such an opportunity.

VI.4.2 Assessment of LSU Discover Student Learning Outcome 5Broadly speaking, the expected outcome of an undergraduate research project in which the student explores a research question to its end includes the ability to analyze and synthesize information, to empathize and engage ethically, to problem-solve, to communicate effectively in a variety of modes, to utilize new and appropriate technologies, and to understand the fundamental components of the general research process. Working either independently or in partnership on complex problems, then communicating the process and findings to a diverse audience, effectively advances a student towards mastery of the competencies, as evidenced by presentations that demonstrate the ability to analyze a problem/question and hypothesize a solution/answer.

At Research Day, students participating either in mentored research or in one of the transformed LSU Discover curricula, after full exploration of a research question, present formally the results of the scholarly and/or creative work they have accomplished working alongside faculty mentors throughout the academic year. Most importantly, through their poster sessions, oral presentations, and creative performances/installations, undergraduates learn to explain and connect their work to a general audience. The resulting shared learning and discussion among faculty, staff, students, and community members is a valuable experience for many students and guests. While students’ development of SLOs informs this display at the highest level of their accomplishment, a campus-wide undergraduate research event provides students with the opportunity to present, explain, and justify their projects and conclusions, and offers the optimal opportunity for LSU Discover evaluators, using the rubric associated with SLO5-communication, to determine their level of attainment of this outcome.

VI.4.3 Pilot Programs Two “pilots” for Research Day informed the feasibility of the project and made possible practice application of the rubric-based assessment in use for SLO5-communication. One pilot occurred in August 2013, and the second will take place in March 2014. The first was a poster session that was entirely STEM based, while the second will include oral presentations from across campus. In year one of the QEP the event will be expanded to include creative performances.

A pilot assessment also was performed during the LSU Summer Undergraduate Research Forum Symposium held on August 2, 2013. This was a regional symposium composed of 155 posters presented by undergraduate STEM students from a variety of universities in the region. Eight LSU faculty volunteers participated as evaluators to score 10 posters each using the QEP Poster Rubric. Only posters presented by LSU students were chosen for evaluation. The design was developed to be random, with every poster having at least two evaluators. The scores were compiled and analyzed. The final score for each poster was the average of two or three evaluation sheets (rubric in Appendix L).

In March 2014, LSU Discover will launch a second pilot initiating Research Day for undergraduates on this campus. All departments and colleges on campus will be invited. Approximately 150 participants are anticipated. Although these initial presentations will not reflect the changes instituted through the other facets of LSU Discover (first-year orientation, curricular change, or mentored

51

research), they will provide data outside the STEM disciplines that will make possible further refinement of the goals and formal strategies of LSU Discover. Furthermore, the event will “kick off” LSU Discover and bring attention and interest to the institutional commitment to undergraduate research.

VI.4.4 Research Day/Week — OrganizationResearch Day will recognize students’ scholarly and creative innovations across all disciplines, and in year two, this event will be expanded to a Research Week, showcasing open houses by each academic college. The event will include student presentations, keynote speakers, job fairs, and networking opportunities with faculty, students, and community partners.

Participation: To introduce all students to research opportunities on campus, and to connect the work of our most advanced students with our entering students, several on-campus groups will participate in Research Day. The First Year Experience Program, Residential Colleges, Greek Life, honor societies, Student Government, and Campus Life will collaborate with LSU Discover to engage and inform students. Information sessions, student presentations, workshops, and events will be organized through these offices to invite students to participate as presenters, audience, and volunteers to help “stage” the event. In addition, the following groups will be invited to participate in Research Day: students engaged in mentored research (see Section VI.3); students enrolled in courses/programs focused on undergraduate research (see Section VI.2); and students attending co-curricular activities related to LSU Discover (see Section VI.1).

Academic colleges will be encouraged to host “open houses,” introducing all students to the research undertaken by undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. In this manner, Research Day will also serve as a means of making LSU students aware of the research opportunities on and off campus and of programs within departments, and it will allow them to meet faculty who may become their mentors. All upper-level administrators, faculty mentors, and advisory groups will also be invited, providing students with further opportunities to discuss research opportunities and hone networking skills.

In year two, faculty will be asked to present the work of undergraduate research teams, working together in labs, design teams, or performance groups. Groups that are interdisciplinary in nature will be particularly encouraged to present their work. Likewise, as the event transforms to Research Week, the organizers will attempt to align its timing with such major recruiting efforts as Spring Invitational to enhance impact.

Invitations to this event will extend beyond the LSU campus. To foster and promote research opportunities in the private sector, a variety of community and industry partners will be invited, and additional invitations will be extended to parents, recruitment visitors, and local high school students who have placed at academic fairs.

Student Preparation: To participate in Research Day (and later, Research Week), students are asked to submit an application to the OUR. The application includes a brief abstract describing their work along with a faculty recommendation. Successful abstracts will be printed in the event program and held in the digital archives for all events in the OUR. The applications and abstracts will form a searchable database for campus use and will be used to target departments, colleges, and other guests, alerting them to presentations in their own areas of interest. Prior to the application deadline, students should attend two of the LSU Discover Workshops pertaining to Research Day (Section VI.1.2.2, Initiative Two).

The QEP implementation committee will establish a Research Day advisory board charged with reviewing the applications and steering these efforts. The Board includes representatives from all


52


academic colleges, career services, and student affairs, as well as the director and the coordinator of LSU Discover and a representative from the Office of Communications & University Relations. Once applications have been reviewed and students have received notification of their participation, they will have the opportunity to attend additional workshops based on their methods of presentation (see also Section VI.1.2 and associated tables for workshop information).

VI.4.5 Institutionalizing AchievementFollowing Research Day, the QEP Advisory Committee will select a group of participants to showcase their work for admissions previews, new student orientations, and various programmed weekends, such as Parents’ Weekend.

The abstracts from all presentations will be held in a digital repository of student scholarship held by the OUR. This repository, envisioned as a searchable database of student scholarship, may expand to include additional scholarly works by students. Elements of this scholarship will be featured on the LSU Discover Website, as well as in ORED publications. On-campus locations for regularly showcasing the results of student scholarship in the LSU Library, in Residence Halls, and at sites identified by the College Advisory Board (Appendix J) will be determined.

VI.4.6 Assessment Students will present projects in a variety of media, requiring differing modes of assessment. For example, a poster describing a project in environmental sciences will require a method of assessment different from that for a dance performance, or even for an oral presentation on the same subject. Rubrics designed for evaluating posters and oral presentations were noted in Section VI.4.3.

The LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) in coordination with the LSU Assessment Office will evaluate graduating seniors who uploaded documents in the LSU Discover folio in previous years while participating in one of the facets of LSU Discover for student learning progression.

VI.4.7 Timeline Planning for Research Day in the context of LSU Discover began with the assessment of the first pilot in 2013 and will continue with a second pilot in 2014 (year zero). In year one the first comprehensive Research Day will occur, including an application process, introductory workshops, and student awards. In year two, Research Day will expand to a multiple-day event and include faculty research team presentations, college open houses, Graduate School presentations, and career fairs. Workshops for students on effective presentation skills also will be implemented, and student presentations/abstracts will begin to be archived. By year three, visiting judges will view presentations and award prizes to participating students.

http://lsu.edu/discover

53

Table VI.D: Research Day Timeline 2012-

20132013-2014Year 0

2014-2015Year 1

2015-2016Year 2

2016-2017Year 3

2017-2018Year 4

2018-2019Year 5

# Students Assessed

35 150 150 300 400 500 500

Event Pilot I Pilot II Research Day

Research Week Research Week Research Week Research Week

College open houses

College open houses

College open houses

College open houses

Graduate school fairs




Career fairs Career fairs Career fairs Career fairs

Student Preparation

Workshops: 1. Event info 2. How to write abstract

Workshops 1 and 2; add poster presentation, PowerPoint presentation, oral/creative performance




Awards Student awards

Student awards Student awards Student awards Student awards

Faculty mentor awards




Institutionalization Archive abstracts in digital repository

Archive abstracts in digital repository



Faculty Participation

Faculty research team presentation




Visiting judges Visiting judges Visiting judges

VI.4.8 Resources Research Day is organized and administered by the OUR with assistance from the Research Day Advisory Board. In anticipation of expanding the event to include the academic open houses during Research Week, several academic colleges have established sub-committees to organize the programs. Preparatory workshops will be available through the library, the CxC program, and some academic colleges.

This section delineates the summative role of Research Day in the sense that this event provides students with a valuable capstone experience through which the multi-semester interventions that constitute LSU Discover are effectively integrated. This event brings into focus, for the first time, the research outputs of individual LSU students in the context of both the university learning competencies and the specific learning outcomes of LSU Discover. Besides being an invaluable means of recruiting LSU students for participation in the preceding activities of LSU Discover, and thus for improving their learning exponentially, Research Day communicates to Louisiana families and to the massive private sector community of the region the generation of new knowledge and the impressive workforce development that inform undergraduate education at LSU.


54


VII. Timeline: The Logical Calendaring of All Actions to Be Implemented A timeline for activities in LSU Discover has been established. The timeline of main activities in Table VII.A includes pilot efforts in year zero and illustrates the planned implementation of activities across the succeeding five years. The curricular transformation activities implemented as pilots will continue in year one.

Table VII.B illustrates a timeline of the program by SLOs and includes the activities that are to be assessed. This necessarily focused assessment allows for the effective use of available resources and accentuates quality through simplicity of structure. As it assesses aspects of LSU Discover across time, the assessment committee will undertake continuous evaluation of the assessment plan and make adjustments as warranted in observation of the actual details of implementation and in the assessment results. The QEP implementation team will document formal adjustments to the plan.

Breakfast honoring the LSU Discover scholars

55

Tabl

e VI

I.A: T

imel

ine

by A

ctiv

ities

Act

iviti

es/C

ompo

nent

s Ye

ar 0

Year

1Ye

ar 2

Year

3Ye

ar 4

Year

5

Year

0 =

Jul

y 1

2013

– J

une

30 2

014,

etc

.Fa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

g

Ass

essm

ent

QEP

Sur

veys

(em

ploy

ers/

boar

ds/s

tude

nts/

facu

lty/s

taff)

Nat

iona

l Sur

vey

of S

tude

nt E

ngag

emen

t (N

SSE)

Each

yea

r of fi

rst-y

ear a

nd s

enio

r stu

dent

s

Uni

vers

ity L

earn

ing

Com

pete

ncie

s As

sess

men

tEa

ch Y

ear

Asse

ssm

ent o

f Dig

ital R

espo

nse

Folio

Each

Yea

r

Co-

Cur

ricul

ar A

ctiv

ities

Com

mun

icat

ion

and

Info

Lite

racy

wor

ksho

ps a

nd o

nlin

e tu

toria

ls (s

ee T

able

VI.A

.2, A

ctiv

ities

G a

nd K

)Pi

lot

2-8

times

per

Fal

l/Spr

ing

sem

este

rs

Trai

ning

RAs

to d

iscu

ss L

SU D

isco

ver o

ppor

tuni

ties

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.1

, Act

ivity

F)

Befo

re th

e Fa

ll Se

mes

ter o

f eac

h ye

ar

Res

iden

tial c

olle

ge p

rese

ntat

ions

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.1

, Act

ivity

A)

Pilo

t1x

per

sem

este

r /ha

ll O

R P

rese

ntat

ion

"Rea

lity

Cha

t"

Dis

play

pos

ters

/par

ticip

ate

in O

RED

Sci

ence

Caf

é (s

ee T

able

VI.A

.1, A

ctiv

ities

D a

nd E

)Fa

ll se

mes

ter f

or p

oste

rs; S

cien

ce C

afé

whe

n av

aila

ble

Visi

t to

rese

arch

faci

lity

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.1

, Act

ivity

B)

Two

per y

ear

LSU

Dis

cove

r: H

ow to

Get

Invo

lved

, Wha

t to

Expe

ct (s

ee T

able

VI.A

.1, A

ctiv

ity C

)Fa

ll of

eac

h ye

ar

One

cre

dit a

nd o

n-lin

e co

urse

s (E

thic

s an

d LS

U 1

001/

LIS

1001

) (se

e Ta

ble

VI.A

.2, A

ctiv

ities

H a

nd I)

Onc

e a

sem

este

r/ tw

ice

a ye

ar

Wor

ksho

p/on

line

tuto

rial (

Scie

ntifi

c M

etho

d &

Ethi

cal C

ondu

ct) (

see

Tabl

e VI

.A.2

, Act

ivity

J)

2x p

er y

ear +

on

dem

and,

virt

ual

Info

rmat

ion

and

Prac

tice

sess

ions

for R

esea

rch

Day

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.3

, Act

iviti

es L

and

M)

2-3

Sess

ions

per

yea

r

Seni

or S

tude

nt a

nd D

isci

plin

e-ce

ntric

sup

port-

grou

p m

eetin

gs (T

able

VI.A

.3, A

ctiv

ities

N a

nd O

)M

onth

ly

Men

torin

g w

orks

hops

for p

eer m

ento

rs (T

able

VI.A

.3, A

ctiv

ity P

)O

ffere

d 4

times

per

yea

r

Cur

ricul

ar T

rans

form

atio

n

Arch

itect

ure

and

C&E

Pilo

ts

Cal

l for

cur

ricul

um o

r cou

rse

trans

form

atio

n pr

opos

als/

prop

osal

eva

luat

ion

Cal

l for

pro

posa

ls in

Fal

l of e

ach

year

/ Eva

luat

ions

in S

prin

g

Cur

ricul

ar a

nd c

ours

e ch

ange

s de

velo

ped

Fall-

-win

ners

of p

revi

ous

year

Firs

t run

of c

urric

ulum

/cou

rse

Sprin

g--w

inne

rs o

f pre

viou

s ye

ar

Men

tore

d R

esea

rch

Men

tors

hips

Begi

ns e

arly

in s

tude

nt's

curri

culu

m

LSU

Dis

cove

r the

Offi

ce o

f Und

ergr

adua

te R

esea

rch

Pilo

t

Asse

ssm

ent P

ilot

Facu

lty m

ento

ring

Wor

ksho

psEa

ch y

ear p

rior t

o ap

plic

atio

n de

adlin

es

Res

earc

h D

ay

Res

earc

h D

ay P

ilots

/Eve

ntPi

lot

Pilo

tR

esea

rch

Wee

k

Stud

ent A

war

ds

Facu

lty M

ento

r Aw

ards

Inst

itutio

naliz

atio

n –

Arch

ive

abst

ract

s in

Dig

ital R

epos

itory

Facu

lty R

esea

rch

Team

Pre

sent

atio

n (s

ee S

ectio

n VI

.4.4

)

Visi

ting

Judg

es (s

ee S

ectio

n VI

.4.7

)

56


Tabl

e VI

I.B: T

imel

ine

by S

LO (c

ontin

ues

on n

ext p

age)

Act

iviti

esYe

ar 0

Ye

ar 1

Ye

ar 2

Ye

ar 3

Ye

ar 4

Ye

ar 5

Ye

ar 0

= J

uly

1 20

13 –

Jun

e 30

201

4, e

tc.

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

SLO

1 –

Lite

ratu

reC

o-C

urric

ular

Act

iviti

esLS

U 1

001/

LIS

1001

cou

rses

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.2

, Act

ivity

H)

Onc

e a

sem

este

r/ tw

ice

a ye

arFi

eld

trips

to o

ff-ca

mpu

s fa

cilit

ies

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.1

, Act

ivity

B)

twic

e a

year

Wor

ksho

ps b

y C

xC a

nd L

ibra

ries

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.2

, Act

ivity

G)

Pilo

t2-

8 tim

es p

er F

all/S

prin

g se

mes

ters

Cur

ricul

ar T

rans

form

atio

nAr

chite

ctur

e pi

lot

Coa

st &

Env

ironm

ent p

ilot

Dev

elop

Cur

ricul

um a

nd s

tand

-alo

ne c

ours

e nu

mbe

r Se

vera

l new

sta

rts p

er y

ear

Men

tore

d R

esea

rch

Men

tors

hips

Sem

este

r 1: I

ntro

to L

itera

ture

Men

tors

hips

Sem

este

r 2: R

ead

Lite

ratu

reM

ento

rshi

ps F

inal

Sem

este

r: An

alyz

e Li

tera

ture

SLO

2 –

Met

hods

Cur

ricul

ar T

rans

form

atio

nAr

chite

ctur

e pi

lot

Coa

st &

Env

ironm

ent p

ilot

Dev

elop

Cur

ricul

um a

nd s

tand

-alo

ne c

ours

e nu

mbe

r Se

vera

l new

sta

rts p

er y

ear

Men

tore

d R

esea

rch

Men

tors

hips

Sem

este

r 1,2

, and

Fin

al: L

earn

met

hod

SLO

3 –

Ethi

csC

o-C

urric

ular

Act

iviti

esR

esea

rch

Ethi

cs T

rain

ing

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.2

)on

-dem

and

On-

line

cour

ses

(eth

ics)

(see

Tab

le V

I.A.2

, Act

ivity

I)on

-dem

and

Wor

ksho

p/on

line

tuto

rial (

Sci.

Met

hod

& Et

hica

l Con

d.) (

see

Tabl

e VI

.A.2

, Act

ivity

J)

2x p

er y

ear +

on

dem

and,

virt

ual

Cur

ricul

ar T

rans

form

atio

nAr

chite

ctur

e pi

lot

Coa

st &

Env

ironm

ent p

ilot

Dev

elop

Cur

ricul

um a

nd s

tand

-alo

ne c

ours

e nu

mbe

r Se

vera

l new

sta

rts p

er y

ear

57

Tabl

e VI

I.B: T

imel

ine

by S

LO (c

ontin

ued)

Act

iviti

esYe

ar 0

Ye

ar 1

Ye

ar 2

Ye

ar 3

Ye

ar 4

Ye

ar 5

Ye

ar 0

= J

uly

1 20

13 –

Jun

e 30

201

4, e

tc.

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

Fall

Sprin

gFa

llSp

ring

SLO

3 –

Ethi

cs (c

ontin

ued)

Men

tore

d R

esea

rch

Men

tors

hips

Sem

este

r 1: I

ntro

to E

thic

sM

ento

rshi

ps F

inal

Sem

este

r: R

ecog

nize

Eth

ics

Res

earc

h D

ayR

esea

rch

Day

: Eth

ics

SLO

4 –

Orig

inal

Idea

Cur

ricul

ar T

rans

form

atio

nAr

chite

ctur

e pi

lot

Coa

st &

Env

ironm

ent p

ilot

Dev

elop

Cur

ricul

um a

nd s

tand

-alo

ne c

ours

e nu

mbe

r Se

vera

l new

sta

rts p

er y

ear

Men

tore

d R

esea

rch

Men

tors

hips

Sem

este

r 1: I

ntro

to O

rigin

al Id

eaM

ento

rshi

ps F

inal

Sem

este

r: R

ecog

nize

an

Orig

inal

Idea

Res

earc

h D

ayR

esea

rch

Day

: Ide

aSL

O5

– C

omm

unic

atio

nC

urric

ular

Tra

nsfo

rmat

ion

Arch

itect

ure

pilo

tC

oast

& E

nviro

nmen

t pilo

tD

evel

op C

urric

ulum

and

sta

nd-a

lone

cou

rse

num

ber

Seve

ral n

ew s

tarts

per

yea

rM

ento

red

Res

earc

hM

ento

rshi

ps F

inal

Sem

este

r: C

omm

unic

atio

nR

esea

rch

Day

Res

earc

h D

ay: C

omm

unic

atio

n

Chapter VII Timeline

58


School of Veterinary Medicine

School of Coast & Environment

59

VIII. Project ManagementHoused in ORED, LSU Discover will report also to the Office of Academic Affairs. In 2008, having established an Office of Undergraduate Research, the university hired Randy Duran to an endowed professorship and appointed him to direct this office. Dr. Duran, who holds joint or adjunct appointments across several academic units, will serve as QEP director, with the charge of overseeing all aspects of implementation, evaluation, and reporting to ensure success and sustainability. Several new positions have been (or will be) supported under LSU Discover. Additionally, four newly established advisory committees will provide support and be the primary conduit for broad-based institutional feedback.

LSU DISCOVER DIRECTOR: RANDY DURAN The director oversees the operations and staffing of all four activity areas and associated assessments. In particular, he works with the lead operations committee member on curricular transformation and with the College Advisory Board (Appendix J) on refining the request for proposals and processing proposals for curricular transformation. He holds primary responsibility for all aspects of Research Day and, working with the LSU Discover graduate student (GA), recruits judges for Research Day. He also works with the LSU Discover assessment committee to develop and optimize prompts for the digital response folio (DRF) and rubrics for evaluation of student learning. Many of the director’s duties pertain to mentored research, including coordinating peer mentoring workshops, overseeing student transitions from enrollment in curricular grant courses to participation in mentored research, identifying mentor workshop leaders, and working with Associate Professor William Wischusen to identify online mentor training awardees. Together with

FIGURE VIII.A: LSU Discover Project Management

Vice Provost

Assessment Lead

Dean LSU Libraries

Director LSU Assessment OfficeUniversity Relations

LibrarianCoordinator

Website GA Assistant Student Workers Grad Student (GA) Assessment GA

Director

Advisory Committees(College, Student, CCA)

Operations Committee(Implementation)

VC Research & Economic Development

60


the assistance of the coordinator and GA, he provides support and logistics to students who wish to participate in mentored research. He serves as the main point of contact for the off-campus mentor pool and for off-campus research development. He also serves as instructor of record for UNIV courses, and faculty of record for UNIV research-for-credit courses. He is responsible for annual performance evaluations of all LSU Discover staff.

QEP/ LSU DISCOVER COORDINATOR: SARAH FERSTELIn anticipation of LSU Discover, Sarah Ferstel, a full-time coordinator, was hired in September 2013 to assume responsibility for day-to-day operations of LSU Discover; in this role, she has been an integral part of developing and authoring this proposal. With respect to the implementation of LSU Discover, the coordinator assures that the mentored research activities function optimally, is the primary point of contact with students and mentors, compiles results on assessment and other QEP-related activities, and, via 50% support of ORED, supports grant proposal development related to LSU Discover. The coordinator is responsible for programs, projects, and tasks related to all four activities of the QEP and the assessment thereof.

Working with the director on co-curricular activities, the coordinator identifies mentor-student pairs to participate in residential college presentations, schedules and coordinates visits to off-campus research facilities twice a year, and conducts information sessions about Research Day. The coordinator initiates, tracks, monitors, and organizes peer mentor meetings and, working with the compliance director, tracks participation in the Responsible Conduct of Research CITI online courses.

With regard to the activities in the curricular transformation component, the coordinator oversees grant competitions and directs the gathering of secondary data associated with the grants, such as academic performance, retention, and other data of interest to each participating department. In support of the mentored research component, the coordinator provides support and logistics to interested students. The coordinator works with the director and the assessment committee to triangulate assessment data and serves as the primary contact for students in using the DRF. The coordinator provides administrative support for the assessment components of curricular pilots, and compiles results for reporting to the assessment committee. Additionally, the coordinator works with staff in the OAA and with ORED’s business manager to track the QEP budget and prepare regular reports.

LSU DISCOVER ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT A half-time administrative assistant will be hired in year one of the program. The assistant is responsible for assisting the coordinator by interfacing with the assessment effort and compiling results from the four main foci of LSU Discover. Additionally, the assistant is responsible for day-to-day support, including gathering supplementary data from grant awardees; reporting this data to the coordinator for triangulation with other program data; and disseminating, gathering, and compiling assessment data from Research Day. The assistant is responsible for the procurement and distribution of the DRFs and for maintenance and monitoring of this aspect of LSU Discover assessment, including tracking uploaded guided reflections, artifacts, and other content in the DRFs. The assistant maintains the database of mentors/mentees and tracks student performance and enrollment in research enabled-courses campus-wide. The assistant works with Faculty Technology Center (FTC) to implement the online training programs associated with mentored research.

61

LSU DISCOVER LIBRARIAN A full-time librarian will be hired in year one to provide library instruction, including the development and delivery of workshops and online tutorials that support the QEP. A graduate from an MLIS program accredited by the American Library Association is required. The librarian schedules and coordinates awareness activities and develops and delivers workshops associated with Research Day. Working closely with the CCA committee, the librarian helps to integrate fall-semester discussions of RAs with students about LSU Discover. The librarian coordinates workshops and their subsequent transformation into Web-based content on library research methods and critical thinking skills. The librarian is the instructor of record for LIS 1001 and coordinates LSU 1001 in collaboration with residential colleges. The librarian performs information literacy support for the curricular transformation grants.

ASSESSMENT GRADUATE STUDENT (AGA) An assessment graduate assistant embedded in the LSU Office of Assessment and Evaluation disseminates, tracks, and compiles assessment materials. The AGA, who aids the assistant with DRF tasks, is the primary point of contact for students. In the execution of these tasks, the AGA reports also to the OAE director. The AGA works with the LSU Discover coordinator and with the assistant to gather secondary assessment data associated the curricular transformation grants. The AGA also assists the coordinator with development and delivery of summative and formative assessment reports to mentors/mentees and other LSU Discover constituents. The AGA will works with OAE director and staff, through the assessment committee, to develop and revise rubrics and to compile data for reporting to the committee.

LSU DISCOVER GRADUATE STUDENT (GA) The GA primarily assists the coordinator and assistant with tasks related to the four main QEP activities. In support of co-curricular activities, the GA assists the coordinator with the discipline-centric support group meetings and organizes practice sessions for Research Day participants. The GA is responsible for tracking and compiling information on students interested in mentored research for disclosure to the director and the coordinator. The GA serves as a resource for the curricular change competitions and supports the preparation and set-up of Research Day activities. The GA works with the implementers of pilots and with awardees of curricular transformation grants to initiate their participation in Research Day. The GA works also with the registrar to track research-for-credit participation campus-wide.

WEBSITE GRADUATE STUDENT (WGA) A Website graduate assistant shared with the Office of Communications & University Relations will maintain the LSU Discover Web and social media presence. The WGA is an important liaison for developing and disseminating publicity related to LSU Discover in collaboration with the LSU Office of Communications & University Relations. The WGA maintains a database of regional, national, and international research opportunities and works with the Faculty Technology Center to post the electronic workshops to the Website. The WGA works with the coordinator and with the registrar’s office to tag and track student records. The WGA also works with the coordinator to compile a database of student presentations, peer-reviewed presentations, and awards.

Chapter VIII Project Management

62


LSU DISCOVER UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT WORKERS (SW) Two undergraduate students at 10 hours per week assist the coordinator and the assistant in day-to-day tasks of LSU Discover. They help organize the peer mentor meetings, track and compile information on LSU Discover alumni, and compile the registration information of Research Day participants. They gather, compile, and maintain the digital database of abstracts, posters, and presentations from Research Day. They support the physical setup for Research Day, including setting up tables, poster stands, and projection equipment. They work with the coordinator to maintain the social media feeds.

The preceding sections and appendices show that LSU Discover is supported by several committees that broadly represent the LSU community. The first and most important of these is the QEP implementation committee (Appendix G), which transitions into the operations committee in fall 2014. This committee, which sets policy for LSU Discover, includes one or more faculty that advocate for each of the four main activity foci of LSU Discover and for the major assessment activities of the QEP. A college advisory board (Appendix J) assures representation and optimal interaction with each of the major research-active colleges at LSU. A student advisory board (Appendix M) with membership from each of the major research active colleges, from student government, and from the major college and grant-funded undergraduate research programs at LSU is the primary means for obtaining student input. An assessment committee (Appendix E) oversees implementation of assessment methods and interpretation and reporting of results, both periodically as indicated in the results and annually to the LSU administration. This committee works with the QEP director and operations committee to develop the fifth-year summative report on the success of LSU Discover in improving SLOs. The Council on Co-curricular Activities (Appendix I) introduced in Section VI.1 advises on LSU Discovery activities that impact large numbers of early students. Finally, Research Day subcommittees in each of the participating colleges coordinate the nature and scope of each unit’s participation. Importantly, the funding for LSU Discover staff described herein and for the scoring team of faculty (budgeted at $16,500 in year one and increasing to $55,000 in year five) frees these students, faculty, administrators, and professional staff from otherwise necessary constraints, making them more available to provide the consistent, thoughtful support effective implementation of the activities and heuristic interventions of LSU Discover require.

63

IX. Resources As evidenced by the establishment of LSU’s OUR, the hiring of a full-time coordinator, the significant investment into year zero and pilot activities, and the budget delineated below, the LSU Discover initiative is a major priority for LSU. The QEP implementation committee’s persistent and methodical study of details of the projected activities and associated resources informs the budget. Via a combination of in-kind and significant new cash resources, the university is committing approximately $5 million, including pre-QEP investment into pilots and planning, with more than $2 million in new cash committed to enhancing the learning outcomes of students in the area of undergraduate research. As the project proceeds, all budget-related expenses will be administered, tracked, and evaluated by the OUR and reported to the LSU administration through an annual report.

LSU Discover Scholars and their mentors were honored in an on-field ceremony during the Nov 29, 2013, LSU-Arkansas football game.

64


Table IX.A: BudgetYear 0 = July 1 2013 – June 30 2014, etc. Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 0-5 Total 1-5 Total

New Resources

Co-curricular activities

LSU Discover presentations $0 $3,800 $3,800 $3,800 $3,800 $3,800 $19,000 $19,000

Student posters/displays $0 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 $10,000

Workshops/online tutorials $1,000 $10,500 $8,000 $8,000 $5,000 $5,000 $37,500 $36,500

Other $0 $400 $400 $400 $400 $400 $2,000 $2,000

Co-curricular activities subtotal $1,000 $16,700 $14,200 $14,200 $11,200 $11,200 $68,500 $67,500


Architecture Pilot $3,000 $37,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,500 $37,500

Coast and Environment Pilot $2,000 $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,000 $30,000

Curricular Transformation Grants $0 $0 $20,000 $60,000 $80,000 $80,000 $240,000 $240,000

Course grants $0 $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $50,000 $50,000

Curricular Transformation subtotal $5,000 $67,500 $25,000 $70,000 $95,000 $100,000 $362,500 $357,500

Mentored Research

Workshops $0 $14,500 $14,500 $14,500 $14,500 $14,500 $72,500 $72,500

Travel $1,000 $2,000 $10,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $73,000 $72,000

Awards $0 $14,000 $21,000 $26,000 $33,000 $33,000 $127,000 $127,000

Mentored Research subtotals $1,000 $30,500 $45,500 $60,500 $67,500 $67,500 $272,500 $271,500

Research Day/Week

Facilities and supplies $4,531 $4,200 $14,821 $18,125 $22,425 $19,500 $83,602 $79,071

Awards and Travel $200 $2,200 $2,400 $7,400 $8,400 $8,400 $29,000 $28,800

Research Day subtotal $4,731 $6,400 $17,221 $25,525 $30,825 $27,900 $112,602 $107,871

Staff (includes fringe benefits and raises)(LSU Discover Coordinator and Year 0 faculty stipends included in ‘Existing staff’ line)

LSU Discover Librarian $0 $31,050 $64,584 $67,167 $69,852 $72,647 $305,300 $305,300

LSU Discover Administrative Assistant $0 $24,150 $25,116 $26,120 $27,165 $28,251 $130,802 $130,802

Faculty summer stipends $0 $39,536 $41,116 $42,760 $44,432 $46,207 $214,051 $214,051

Graduate Assistants $0 $83,790 $87,141 $90,624 $78,543 $73,516 $413,614 $413,614

Student workers $1,813 $7,250 $7,750 $8,250 $8,750 $9,250 $43,063 $41,250

New staff subtotal $1,813 $185,776 $225,707 $234,921 $228,742 $229,871 $1,106,830 $1,105,017

Assessment

Salary/payment $1,500 $16,500 $28,000 $41,500 $42,500 $55,000 $185,000 $183,500

TaskStream $3,086 $18,625 $26,250 $36,250 $33,750 $25,000 $142,961 $139,875

Assessment subtotal $4,586 $35,125 $54,250 $77,750 $76,250 $80,000 $327,961 $323,375

Other

Other subtotal $91,305 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $141,305 $50,000

New Resources Totals $109,435 $352,001 $391,878 $492,896 $519,517 $526,471 $2,392,198 $2,282,763

In-kind, existing, and Year 0 resources

In-kind $233,508 $307,941 $374,391 $471,891 $621,891 $696,891 $2,706,513 $2,473,005

Existing staff $141,000 $64,584 $67,167 $69,852 $72,647 $75,552 $490,802 $349,802

Year 0 resources (taken from Year 0 total) $109,435 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $109,435 $0

In-kind, existing, and Year 0 resources subtotal $483,943 $372,525 $441,558 $541,743 $694,538 $772,443 $3,306,750 $2,822,807

New, Existing, and in-kind Grand totals $483,943 $724,526 $833,436 $1,034,639 $1,214,055 $1,298,914 $5,698,948 $5,105,570

* The national average of over 200 QEP efforts in the SACSCOC region for level 6 institutions is approximately $500,000 per year.

65

X. LSU Discover AssessmentThe success of the LSU Discover initiative is informed by systematic assessment at every level of implementation. The details documented in the previous sections comprise the complete assessment plan that, summarized here, describes the means for determining the intended advances in undergraduate student learning. To summarize, the SLOs are assessed throughout the undergraduate experience, with emphasis on selected SLOs at different stages of students’ college careers (as described in Table X.E: SLOs and Assessment).

X.1 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF QEP ASSESSMENTFormal assessment of LSU Discover is the responsibility of the LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E), with direct support from the LSU Office of Assessment and Evaluation. However, students, faculty, and staff participate at all levels of the program. Data are collected from the student participants under the direction of faculty and staff in each formal component of the program: co-curricular activities (the embedded librarian, CCA, and QEP coordinator), research-intensive courses (faculty PIs of QEP-supported grants), transformed curricula (deans, department chairs, and instructors of QEP supported grants), mentored research (faculty mentors and the QEP coordinator), and Research Day activities (faculty, OUR staff, and students). The diagram shown in Figure X.A demonstrates the organizational structure and the feedback loop to guide and ensure the success of formal evaluation efforts.

FIGURE X.A: Organization of LSU Discover Assessment

Provost/Academic Affairs

Assessment Chair

Assessment Measures

QEP Coordinator

QEP Team

Faculty/Student Advisory Committees

Implementation/Operations Committee

QEP Assessment Committee LSU Office of Assessment

QEP Director

Co-Curricular Activities


Mentored Research

Research Day

66


X.2 ASSESSMENT OF SLOSPrimary assessment pertains to evaluation of advances in the QEP SLOs. Table X.A provides an overview of how this assessment is organized across LSU Discover activities via a general schedule; SLO1 is used as an example in this table, and SLOs 2-5 appear in Appendix N. The level of success in each student’s achievement of each SLO is the most important indicator of the overall success of the QEP. As noted in Section IV, determination of student achievement is based on a comprehensive rubric for each SLO. Determining levels of student achievement for each outcome for each category of student participants involves rubric-based evaluation of authentic course assignments that students upload into the LSU Discover Primary folio. Students’ participation in this aspect of the process, however, involves significantly more than the simple uploading of completed assignments. LSU Discover posits an integral relationship between student achievement and assessment of SLOs, and this emphasis is stressed in the expository information presented to students as part of a formal initiation into program participation and reinforced through such repetitions as periodic correspondence from program administrators housed in the OUR and formal indications of faculty working with students in mentoring or curricular contexts. Consistent documentation of learning is a shared responsibility among students, faculty, and LSU Discover Program coordinators. Tracking student learning across six years (years zero through five), LSU Discover documents evolution of participating students’ achievement of the SLOs, with the culminating points of evaluation being students’ communication of the details and results of their efforts in presentations on Research Day and through digital self-representation.

Section VI.1 introduces a group of co-curricular activities that, offered on a modular basis to a large number of undergraduates, present information designed to introduce students to fundamental concepts of formal academic research. As noted in Section IV, these activities reside at the lower levels of Bloom’s hierarchy of learning domains and are assessed accordingly. As an example of the formative assessment, in addition to those noted in Table X.A, students are invited to complete discipline-oriented online training courses in the responsible conduct of research. Completion of the courses, which include built-in assessments, indicates advancement toward achievement of SLO3-ethics and documented by a certificate of completion. First-year students participating in the available co-curricular activities are assessed primarily for advances in SLO1-literacy and SLO3-ethics. In addition to these activities, each fall and spring semesters some first-year students will take either LSU 1001 or LIS 1001, and some eventually take both. These courses will emphasize information literacy (SLO1-literacy) and the responsible conduct of research, such as providing appropriate citations, references, and quotation where appropriate (SLO3-ethics). Assessment of SLO1-literacy and SLO3-ethics in some instances may be performed by course exams administered by the instructors. Using the rubric provided in Table X.B, instructors compile the assessment data and provide a report each semester to the QEP coordinator, who uploads this assessment data into the LSU Discover overall planning module located in TaskStream. The OUR compiles a summary report of this assessment annually, by early summer, for the consideration of the assessment committee in its preparation of the annual report to the provost. Through the OUR, with the support of the Center for Academic Success and the Council on Co-curricular Activities, students are encouraged to participate in a range of workshops and online tutorials that will enhance the training of first – and second-year students in SLO1-literacy, SLO1-methods, SLO3-ethics, and SLO5-communication (see Section VI.1). Surveys administered as part of the workshops and online tutorials contribute to the body of data that informs annual reporting and continuous improvement of co-curricular processes across the span of LSU Discover.

67

A pilot assessment of student poster presentations performed in August 2013 by members of the QEP implementation committee, supported by additional faculty, made transparent the usefulness of particular student interventions as described in Section VI.4.3. Results from this pilot reinforced the plan for enhancing exposure of students to SLO interventions in the early years through designated co-curricular activities, in later years through prescribed transformed curricula and mentoring, and in the ultimate year, through workshops for students preparing to present at Research Day. A second piloting of the assessment strategy planned for Research Day will take place in March 2014.

Table X.A: General Schedule of Assessment and Related Artifacts (SLO1; Appendix N contains SLOs 2 through 5)

Co-curricular activities

Curricular Transformation Mentored Research

Research Day

Poster Talk

SLO1 Identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information and/or literature sources associated with a research project.

Participation/completion of activity

Research project(s) and course(s) assessment

Written works; poster and/or oral presentations; digital e-portfolio (see QEP Written Communication Rubric, QEP Critical Thinking Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, and QEP Spoken Rubric)

Table X.B: Student Achievement in SLOs Rubric* (SLO1; Appendix O contains SLOs 2 through 5)

Developing Competent Accomplished

SLO1 Identify and effectively evaluate essential supporting information and/or literature sources associated with a research project.

Discipline Specific Framework

Does not recognize previous works or theoretical frameworks associated with the research question

Recognizes key works or theoretical frameworks associated with the research question, but cannot differentiate, select or adapt them to other subjects

Demonstrates the ability to recognize key works or theoretical frameworks associated with the research question, and can differentiate, select or adapt them to other subjects

Exploration Does not recognize, select or apply supporting information and/or literature in discipline associated with research question

Recognizes or selects supporting information and/or literature, but does not apply appropriately to research question

Demonstrates the ability to consistently recognize and select supporting information

Information Literacy

Does not distinguish or critically evaluate scholarly resources; uses inappropriate sources for inquiry

Distinguishes between scholarly resources and popular works, but does not consistently use discipline appropriate sources for inquiry

Demonstrates the ability to distinguish scholarly resources from popular works and consistently applies them to the research inquiry

* The rubrics for each of the SLOs are under development. In some cases, they are adapted from American Association of Colleges and Universities VALUE rubrics as well as from the undergraduate student learning outcomes rubrics from Florida Atlantic University. An example for SLO1 is shown above; SLOs 2-5 are in Appendix O.

X.3 ALIGNMENT OF LSU DISCOVER SLOS ASSESSMENT WITH ONGOING ASSESSMENT EFFORTS AT LSUThe LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E) recognizes the usefulness of triangulating LSU Discover assessment with ongoing annual outcomes assessments at the degree program level and of the university learning competencies (general education competencies). The committee will coordinate this alignment through an integrated report based on a review of annual statistical and narrative reports in TaskStream.

Chapter X LSU Discover Assessment

68


X.4 USE OF RESULTS TO IMPROVE PROGRAM COMPONENTSAssessment data and associated information are formally and systematically reviewed by the LSU Discover assessment committee (Appendix E). Formal dissemination of results through the OUR and the assessment committee provides information to faculty participants and program implementers at all levels of the process. Of particular interest is the evaluation of data pertaining to the relation of LSU Discover interventions to student performance on the prescribed learning outcomes. Important, too, is the functionality of the various administrative aspects of LSU Discover activities. The assessment committee is responsible not only for systematic formal evaluation of the ongoing components of the general program, but also for making strategic determinations about reporting the results, including when and to whom, and making recommendations to implementers about potential revisions in ongoing course and curricular interventions, mentoring activities, and co-curricular processes associated with LSU Discover.

Compilation, analysis, and interpretation of results by the assessment committee inform and guide the overall improvement of the QEP program through reports to faculty and administrators after each instance of formal rubric-based scoring. Student scores are tabulated and maintained longitudinally in order to optimize understanding of student growth. The scores of representative samples of students participating in relative aspects of LSU Discover are evaluated and the results meaningfully correlated to disclose discrepancies in student learning and to identify areas for potential improvement. Each June, the assessment committee begins a focused analysis and evaluation of assessment results from each of the four facets of LSU Discover that culminates in an annual summary report to the provost before the beginning of the following fall semester.

X.5 TABLE OF ASSESSMENT METHODSThe particular assessment designs for each of the four facets of the QEP are presented in Tables X.C through X.E.

Table X.C: Overview of QEP Activities (continues on next page)

QEP Activities Purpose Student Impact (Who) Alterations (What) Timing (When) Mechanisms

(How)

Co-curricular Activities

Introduce large numbers of students to research

First- and second-year students

Building student research-based learning skills through courses, workshops, online tutorials, and other events

Years 1-5; emphasis on development of these activities will be on the front end

Incorporation into LSU 1001, LIS 1001, First Year Experience, Residential College, CAS, and development of workshops and tutorials


Promote research-intensive course availability and develop multi-semester, discipline-specific training in undergraduate research

Students in degree programs, from first-year students to graduating seniors

Increased availability of research-intensive courses and permanent changes in degree program curricula that enhance research training

Years 1-5; pilot programs in architecture and coastal environmental science began in year 0

Departmental/college QEP-funded, integrated curricular change proposals; Faculty QEP-funded course change proposals

69

Table X.C: Overview of QEP Activities (continued)

QEP Activities Purpose Student Impact (Who) Alterations (What) Timing (When) Mechanisms

(How)

Mentored Research Promote one-on-one student mentor relationships that last multiple semesters

First year to seniors, depending upon when the student begins

Increased number of students participating in mentored research and research-for-credit

Years 1-5; Development of mentor workshops; increased number of faculty mentors; off-campus industrial mentorships; thesis/capstone student recognition

Research Day Expose large numbers of students to research; forum for students to develop presentations skills

All student presenters and all students visiting the Research Day events, as well as faculty visitors

Organized campus-wide forum for students to present their research and network with other students, faculty, and community

Years 1-5; it is anticipated that Research Day will expand into Research Week

Development of workshops on presentation skills; forum for research presentations; department research “open houses”

Table X.D: QEP Learning Outcomes & Related Interventions

SLO Co-Curricular Activities

Curricular Transformation Mentored Research Research Day

1 Identify & effectively evaluate essential supporting information &/or literature sources associated with a research project

Introduction of students to scholarly resources through courses, workshops, online tutorials, & other events

Introduction of students to research inquiry & scholarly resources in initial discipline-specific courses

Mentors direct students’ development of literature skills (2) Student’s formal reflection

2 Utilize tools & strategies for gathering & evaluating data, & apply the results to the solution of the research problem

Students acquire skills and experience in research methods and approaches to solving research problems

Mentors direct students to acquire skills and experience in discipline-specific research methods and approaches to solving problems

3 Demonstrate awareness of responsible conduct of research

Expose large numbers of students to research ethics through courses, workshops, online tutorials, & other events

In depth coursework devoted to ethical issues & the citation of the works of others in the performance of research

Mentors reinforce students’ commitment to ethical conduct of research

Student display of citations &/or scholarly references in oral, Poster or Performance based communication

4 Identify & describe an original disciplinary research question

Training & experience in generating research questions in discipline

Students respond to a protocol of questions on concept of original research

5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance &/or oral presentation

Student scholarly presentations of research results in Capstone course, Research Day events, and digital portfolio

Mentors guide students presentations for research day (2) student’s draft of digital self or portfolio

Student scholarly communication of their research in an organized campus-wide event

Chapter X LSU Discover Assessment

70


Table X.E: SLOs and Assessment (Curricular Transformation, Mentored Research and Research Day appear in Appendix P)

SLO Competencies Method(s) Responsible Unit Timing Processing


Demonstrates the ability to distinguish scholarly resources from popular works in the pursuit of research inquiry

Assessed by exam questions, quizzes, and surveys

Administered and collected by course instructors of LSU 1001, LIS 1001, First Year Experience, Residential College, workshops and tutorials

Final exams in LSU 1001 & LIS 1001; quizzes and surveys in workshops and tutorials

Assessment data compiled & reported to QEP Coordinator, stored on TaskStream, and evaluated by QEP Assessment Committee

2


Demonstrates recognition of ethical problems and issues in research inquiry

Assessed by designed exam questions, quizzes, and surveys

Administered and collected by course instructors of LSU 1001, LIS 1001, First Year Experience, Residential College, workshops and tutorials

Final exams in LSU 1001 & LIS 1001; quizzes and surveys in workshops and tutorials


4

5

Overall, LSU Discover is poised to expand undergraduate research at LSU and to improve student learning outcomes by introducing students to the challenges and rewards of research.

71

References1. US Census State and Country Quick Facts. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/22/22033.

html. Accessed October 28, 2013.2. Board of Regents’ Master Plan for Public Postsecondary Education. http://regents.louisiana.gov/

wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MasterPlan_Revised_04-12.pdf. Accessed October 28, 2013.3. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.

org/lookup_listings/srp.php?clq=%22basic2005_ids%22%3A%2215%22&limit=0,50. Accessed October 28, 2013.

4. Morrill Act. http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Morrill.html. Accessed October 28, 2013.5. Sea Grant. http://www.laseagrant.org. Accessed October 28, 2013.6. LSU Space Grant. http://laspace.lsu.edu. Accessed October 28, 2013.7. LSU Strategic Plan. http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/pdfs/LSU_AM_

StratPlanLSU2014_2015through2018_2019_June28_2013_Final.pdf. Accessed October 28, 2013

8. LSU Flagship 2020. http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/index.shtml. Accessed October 28, 2013.9. Performance Indicators: Flagship 2020. http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/performance2020.

shtml. Accessed October 28, 2013.10. Trend data: Personnel, Headcount of Faculty and Staff by Gender and Ethnic Group, Fall 2012.

http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/personnel/headcount/facstaff/facstaff2012.pdf. Accessed October 28, 2013.

11. Faculty Fulbright Scholarships at LSU. http://business.lsu.edu/news/releases/Pages/2007/05/LSU-Professor-Awarded-Fulbright-Scholarship-to-Korea.aspx. Accessed October 28, 2013.

12. Faculty Fulbright Scholarships at LSU. http://www.lsu.edu/ur/ocur/lsunews/MediaCenter/News/2008/item5886.html. Accessed October 28, 2013.

13. Council for the Support and Advancement of Education. http://www.usprofessorsoftheyear.org/Winners/Search_Winners.html?state=LA. Accessed October 28, 2013.

14. Southern Region Winner Program for Excellence in College and University Teaching in the Food and Agricultural Sciences. http://www.csrees.usda.gov/business/other_links/awardlist.html. Accessed October 28, 2013.

15. LSU Office of Economic Research and Development Self-Study, 2012. 16. LSU Colleges and Professional Schools. http://www.lsu.edu/students/academics.shtml.

Accessed October 28, 2013.17. Degrees awarded by LSU. http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/students/degrees/deglevel.pdf.

Accessed October 28, 2013.18. Degrees awarded by LSU. http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/students/degrees/deglevel.pdf.

Accessed October 28, 2013.19. LSU SACSCOC Reaffirmation Website: http://uiswcmsweb.prod.lsu.edu/academicaffairs/

sacscoc/Progress%20Toward%20Reaffirmation/Steering%20Committee%20Activities/item45130.html. Accessed November 15, 2013.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/22/22033.html

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/22/22033.html

http://regents.louisiana.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MasterPlan_Revised_04-12.pdf

http://regents.louisiana.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MasterPlan_Revised_04-12.pdf

http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/lookup_listings/srp.php?clq=%22basic2005_ids%22%3A%2215%22&limit=0,50

http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/lookup_listings/srp.php?clq=%22basic2005_ids%22%3A%2215%22&limit=0,50

http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Morrill.html

http://www.laseagrant.org

http://laspace.lsu.edu

http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/pdfs/LSU_AM_StratPlanLSU2014_2015through2018_2019_June28_2013_Final.pdf

http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/pdfs/LSU_AM_StratPlanLSU2014_2015through2018_2019_June28_2013_Final.pdf

http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/index.shtml

http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/performance2020.shtml

http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/performance2020.shtml

http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/personnel/headcount/facstaff/facstaff2012.pdf

http://business.lsu.edu/news/releases/Pages/2007/05/LSU-Professor-Awarded-Fulbright-Scholarship-to-Korea.aspx

http://business.lsu.edu/news/releases/Pages/2007/05/LSU-Professor-Awarded-Fulbright-Scholarship-to-Korea.aspx

http://www.lsu.edu/ur/ocur/lsunews/MediaCenter/News/2008/item5886.html

http://www.lsu.edu/ur/ocur/lsunews/MediaCenter/News/2008/item5886.html

http://www.usprofessorsoftheyear.org/Winners/Search_Winners.html?state=LA

http://www.usprofessorsoftheyear.org/Winners/Search_Winners.html?state=LA

http://www.csrees.usda.gov/business/other_links/awardlist.html

http://www.lsu.edu/students/academics.shtml

http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/students/degrees/deglevel.pdf

http://www.bgtplan.lsu.edu/TREND/students/degrees/deglevel.pdf

http://uiswcmsweb.prod.lsu.edu/academicaffairs/sacscoc/Progress%20Toward%20Reaffirmation/Steering%20Committee%20Activities/item45130.html



72


20. General Catalog 2013-2014. General Education. http://catalog.lsu.edu/content.php?catoid=2&navoid=175. Accessed October 29, 2013.

21. Kardash, C.M. (2000). Evaluation of and undergraduate research experience: perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors. J. Ed. Psychology, 92, 191-201.

22. Bauer, K.W., Bennett J.S. (2003). Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experiences J. Higher Ed., 74, 210-230.

23. Seymour, E, Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S.L., DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates: first findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88, 493-534.

24. Mabrouk, P.A., Peters, K. (2000). Student perspectives on undergraduate research experiences in chemistry and biology. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 21, 25-33.

25. Lopatto, D.(2007). Undergraduate research experiences support career decisions and active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6, 297-306.

26. Zydney, A.L., Bennett, J.S., Shahid, A., Bauer, K.W. (2009). Impact of undergraduate research experience in engineering. Jour. of Engineering Education, 91, 151-157.

27. Wenzel, T. (2003). Definitions of undergraduate research. Retrieved April 12, 2006, from http://abacus.bates.edu/acad/depts/chemistry/twenzel/definition.pdf.

28. Boyer, R., Strum, Shirley, and co-authors (1998). Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing undergraduate education: a blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook http://www.niu.edu/engagedlearning/research/pdfs/Boyer_Report.pdf.

29. Kuh, G.D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: what they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. http://www.neasc.org/downloads/aacu_high_impact_2008_final.pdf.

30. National Science Foundation (1989). Report on the National Science Foundation disciplinary workshops on undergraduate education. NSF 89-3, April 1989. NSF: Washington, D.C., 20550.

31. Craney, C., McKay, T., Mazzeo, A., Morris, J., Prigodich, C., de Groot, R. (2011). Cross-discipline perceptions of the undergraduate research experience. Journal of Higher Education, 82, 92-113.

32. Nagda, B.A., Gregerman, S.R., Jonides, J., von Hippel, W., Lerner, J.S. (1998). Undergraduate student-faculty research partnerships affect student retention. Rev. Higher Educ., 22, 55-72.

33. Hathaway, R.S., Nagda, B.A., Gregerman, S.R. (2002). The relationship of undergraduate research participation to graduate and professional education pursuit: an empirical study. J. College Student Development, 43, 614-631.

34. Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., McCullough, J. (2007). The benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 27, 548-549.

35. Hurdato, S., Eagan, M.K., Cabrera, N.L., Lin, M.H., Park, J., Lopez, M. (2008). Training future scientists: predicting first year minority student participation in health science research. Res. Higher Ed., 49, 126-152.

36. Thiry, H. (2011). What experiences help students become scientists? A comparative study of research and other sources of personal and professional gains for STEM Undergraduates. J. Higher Ed., 82, 357-388.

http://catalog.lsu.edu/content.php?catoid=2&navoid=175

http://catalog.lsu.edu/content.php?catoid=2&navoid=175

http://abacus.bates.edu/acad/depts/chemistry/twenzel/definition.pdf

http://www.niu.edu/engagedlearning/research/pdfs/Boyer_Report.pdf

http://www.neasc.org/downloads/aacu_high_impact_2008_final.pdf

73

37. Osborn, J. M., Karukstis, K. K. (2009). The benefits of undergraduate research, scholarship, and creative activity In: M. Boyd and J. Wesemann (Eds.), pp 41-53, Broadening Participation in Undergraduate Research: Fostering Excellence and Enhancing the Impact. Council on Undergraduate Research, Washington, DC.

38. Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S., Seymour, E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: the role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Sci. Educ., 91, 36-74.

39. Seymour, E, Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S., DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates: first findings from a three-year study, Sci. Educ., 88,493-594.

40. Fechheimer, M., Webber, K., Kleiber, P.B. (2011). How well do undergraduate research programs promote engagement and success of students? Life Sciences Education, 10, 156-162.

41. Grafstein, A. (2002). A discipline-based approach to information literacy, J. Academic Librarianship, 28, 197.

42. Belanger, J., Bliquez, R., Mondal, S. (2012). Developing a collaborative faculty-librarian information literacy assessment project. Library Review, 61, 68.

43. Farrell, R. (2012). Reconsidering the relationship between generic and situated IL approaches: the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition in formal information literacy learning environments, Part I. Library Philosophy & Practice, 1–16.

44. Daniels, M., Yakel, E. (2013). Uncovering impact: the influence of archives on student learning, J. Acad. Librarianship, 39, 414-422.

45. Walkington, H., Griffin, A.L., Key-Matthews, L., Metoyer, S.K., Miller, W.E., Baker, R., France, D. (2011). Embedding research-based learning early in the undergraduate geography curriculum, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 35, 315-330.

46. Haag, S., Hubele, N., Garcia, A., McBeath, K. (2007). Engineering undergraduate attrition and contributing factors. International Journal of Engineering Education, 23, 929-940.

47. Haag, S., Collofello, J. (2008). Engineering undergraduate persistence and contributing factors. Proc. 38th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, T4D 8-13.

48. Richmond, G. (1998). Scientific apprenticeship and the role of public schools: general education of a better kind. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 583-587.

49. Herman, C., Kirkup, G. (2008). Learners in transition: the use of e-portfolios for women returners to science, engineering and technology. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45:1, 67-76.

50. Cambridge, D. (2008). Audience, integrity, and the living document: eFolio Minnesota and lifelong and lifewide learning with e-portfolios, Computers & Education, 51,1227-1246.

51. Lambert, S., Corrin, L. (2007). Moving towards a university wide implementation of an e-portfolio tool. Austrailasian J. Educational Technology, 23, 1-16.

52. Huang, A.F.M., Wu, J.T.H., Yang, S.J.H., Hwang, W.Y. (2012). The success of e-portfolio-based programming learning style diagnosis: exploring the role of a heuristic fuzzy knowledge fusion. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 8698-8706.

53. Samson, S. (2010). Information literacy learning outcomes and student success. J. Academic Librarianship, 36, 202-210.

References

74


54. Peacock, S., Gordon, L., Murray, S., Morss, K., Dunlop, G. (2010). Tutor response to implementing an e-portfolio to support learning and personal development in further and higher education institutions in Scotland. British J. Education Technology, 41, 827-851.

55. MacMillan, M. (2009). Watching learning happen: results of a longitudinal study of journalism students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35, 132-142.

56. Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2013, from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

57. Grafstein, A. (2002). A discipline-based approach to information literacy. J. Academic Librarianship 4,197-204.

58. Belanger, J., Bliquez, R., Mondal, S. (2012). Developing a collaborative faculty-librarian information literacy assessment project. Library Review, 61:2, 68-91.

59. Farrell, R. (2012). Reconsidering the relationship between generic and situated IL approaches: the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition in formal information literacy learning environments, part I. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1989&context=libphilprac. Accessed Nov 5, 2013.

60. Rowlett, Blockus, and Larson (2012). Characteristics of excellence in undergraduate research CUR publication.

61. Healey, M., Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. York: The Higher Education Academy.

62. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. Reshaping the university: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching. Barnett, R. (ed.) Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press, 30–42.

63. Crowe, M. (2007). The role of campus-wide undergraduate research centers in supporting a research-rich curriculum. In K.K. Karukstis & T.E. Elgren (Eds.), Developing and sustaining a research-supportive curriculum: a compendium of successful practices (pp. 495-505). Washington, DC: Council on Undergraduate Research.

http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1989&context=libphilprac

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1989&context=libphilprac

75

College of Agriculture

Manship School of Mass Communication

76


AppendicesAppendix A: Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) Team (continues on next page)Team Member Affiliation Time on Committee

O’Neil Carol QEP Chair, College of Agriculture November, 2011-pres

Albert, Katrice Vice Provost for Equity, Diversity, and Community Outreach November, 2011-June, 2013

Braun, Bernie Staff Member, Budget & Planning (ex‐officio) August, 2011-pres

Brocato, Melissa Director, Center for Academic Success August, 2011-pres

Connell, Casey Graduate Student Representative (ex‐officio) August, 2011-May, 2013

Delzell, Charles Associate Chair for Instruction, Mathematics, College of Science November, 2011-pres

Duran, Randy Executive Director, Cain Center; Director of Undergraduate Research November, 2011-pres

Feduccia, Mary Director, Career Services November, 2011-pres

Ferstel, Sarah QEP/LSU Discover Coordinator, ORED October, 2013-pres

Foster, Gaines Dean, College of Humanities & Social Sciences November, 2011-pres

Franks, Stephenie Staff Member, Academic Affairs (ex‐officio) November, 2011-pres

Galy, Kristie Director, Col of Human Sciences & Education November, 2011-January, 2012

Garrison, M.E. (Betsy) Associate Dean, College of Agriculture November, 2011-January, 2012

Henriquez, Julie Graduate Student Representative (ex-officio) November 2013-pres

Ivey, Paul Executive Director, University College November, 2011-pres

Jenny, Bruce Professor, College of Agriculture January, 2012-pres

Jones, Khristen Graduate Student Representative (ex‐officio) May, 2013-pres

Kenna, Erin Undergraduate Student Representative (ex‐officio) August, 2013-August, 2012

Landry, Matthew Undergraduate Student Representative (ex‐officio) August, 2012-pres

Liggett, Sarah Director, Communication Across the Curriculum; Professor of English August, 2013-pres

Lilley, Traci Assistant Dean of Field Education, School of Social Work November, 2011-pres

Livingston, Lynn President, Staff Senate November, 2011-pres

Matthews, Bobby Director, Office of Assessment & Evaluation November, 2011-pres

MacGregor, Kim Associate Professor, Education November, 2011-pres

McGuire, Saundra Assistant Vice Chancellor for Learning, Teaching and Retention November, 2011-May, 2013

Miles, Kenneth Interim Vice Provost for Equity, Diversity, and Community June, 2013-present

Pecchioni, Loretta Associate Professor, Communication Studies November, 2011-pres

Ray, Leonard Director, International Studies November, 2011-pres

Reeve, T. Gilmour SACSCOC Liaison & VP for Academic Programs, Planning & Review November, 2011-pres

Smyth, Elaine Interim Dean, LSU Libraries November, 2011-pres

Solmon, Melinda Chair, Kinesiology, College of Education November, 2011-pres

Waggenspack, Warren Associate Dean, College of Engineering November, 2011-pres

Walker, Sandra Staff Member, Budget & Planning (ex‐officio) November, 2011-May, 2013

Wischusen, William Associate Professor and Undergraduate Advisor, College of Science November, 2011-pres

77

Appendix A: Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) Team (continued)Working Team Members

Analysis of Existing Data Albert, Delzell, Duran, Matthews, McGuire, O’Neil, Walker, Wischusen

Student Surveys Connell, Kenna, Livingston, MacGregor, Smyth

Faculty/Staff Surveys Foster, Lilley, Pecchioni

Employer/Advisory Board Surveys Feduccia, Ivey, Waggenspack

Call for Proposals McGuire, O’Neil, Ray

Review of Proposals Entire Team

78


Appendix B: Original Two-to-three Page Concept Papers.Title Department(s) of Individuals or Groups Submitting Concept Papers

Academic Boot Camps for First Year Students BIOS (Biological Sciences), College of Humanities and Social Sciences, College of Science, Academic Affairs

Beyond the One-Shot and the One-Credit: Acknowledging the Nexus between Information Literacy, Critical Thinking, and Academic Writing

LSU Libraries

Course Redesign and Development University College; Mathematics; LSU Academic Technology Services, Faculty Technology Center.

Developing the Graduating Student Profile: Using High-Impact Practices to Forge Coherence across the Undergraduate Curriculum

General Education Committee (Chair, Theater), Office of Assessment and Evaluation, Office of Research and Economic Development (Chemistry), Communication Across the Curriculum (English)

Developing Global Competence across the Curriculum Academic Programs Abroad, International Programs

Developing Strategic Learning Skills to Transform Students’ Lives

Center for Academic Success

Dialogue across the Disciplines Intercollegiate Studies Institute at LSU

Direct Admission to Senior Colleges Biological Sciences

Diversify Your Equation for Success: Exploring the dimensions of wellness and its impact on student success

University Recreation, Division of Student Life and Enrollment

Enhancing Campus and Community Collaboration through Student Experiential Learning

Career Services

Enhancing Undergraduate Learning and Engagement through Communication-Intensive Pedagogy

Communication Across the Curriculum/English

First Generation Student Services & Seminar First Year Experience

First-Year Teachers Make a Difference English

Global learning for the 21st century International Programs, Development and Outreach

Great Books and Big Ideas History, English, Political Science, Philosophy

Increasing Persistence through Complementary Summer Bridge and Peer Mentoring Programs

Office of Strategic Initiatives, STEM Education, Academic Affairs

Involving students in furthering the development of the Louisiana Museum of Natural History (LMNH) at LSU into the research, education, and economic powerhouse it can and should be

Louisiana Museum of Natural History; Members of the Faculty Senate MPA Task Force (Physics and Astronomy)

Learning and Teaching Collaborative: Resources to Support Faculty Development

Faculty Technology Center, Information Technology Services; Center for Academic Success; Communication Across the Curriculum; Academic Affairs; Career Services; CCELL

On-Ramps to Increase Access to University Programs Mathematics

Sustainability Education for Quality Enhancement of LSU Undergraduate Education and Research

Campus Sustainability, Facility Services; Department of Kinesiology; Biological Sciences; Chemical Engineering; Architecture; School of Plant, Environmental, and Soil Sciences (Horticulture); Civil and Environmental Engineering; the School of Coast and Environment; Louisiana Agricultural Extension Service

Undergraduate Creativity, Research, Teaching, and Entrepreneurship LSU-CREATE

LSU Honors College (Department of History); College of Humanities and Social Sciences (Department of Psychology), Assessment and Evaluation, Office of Research and Economic Development (Chemistry)

Using service-learning and the scholarship of engagement to enhance student learning

CCELL, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Office of Assessment and Evaluation

79

Appendix C: Rubric for Scoring Initial Concept Paper Dimension Unacceptable 0 Acceptable 2 Exemplary 4

Problem Statement: Briefly describe the area of student learning this project is intended to enhance. Mention any available data indicating that students at LSU are deficient in this area.Weighted Double

Missing. Needs additional development or is too narrow or lacks focus. Support data are lacking or are incomplete. Does not include defined groups of students. Not sustainable.

Well developed; appropriate for a large group of LSU students. Has potential as a broad-based QEP. Institutional evidence of need is presented. Sustainability possible. May be an extension of an ongoing effort, although adequate evidence may be weak.

Well developed; addresses a current need appropriate for a large group of LSU students. References higher-ed and institutional evidence regarding student learning needs. Sustainable. New endeavor or clearly a significant extension of an ongoing program.

Articulation with Flagship Agenda: Indicate how these activities will address elements of the LSU Flagship 2020.

Missing. Not linked with the LSU Flagship 2020 or generally inappropriate for undergraduates.

Adequately linked with the LSU Flagship 2020 or has the potential to be linked to the Flagship 2020. Clearly appropriate for undergraduates.

Clearly and specifically linked with the LSU Flagship 2020 agenda. Addresses a key element of need for undergraduates.

Brief Description of the Proposed Activities: Briefly describe the proposed activities and their expected impact on student learning.

Missing. Fails to adequately describe activities or their impact on student learning. No clear plan of action.

Specific activities are adequately described or have the potential to generate such actions. Activities can be implemented or have the potential to be implemented. A plan of action is provided, but it may not be fully developed.

Specific activities are well described and can be implemented. A feasible and fully developed plan of action.

Measurable Goals and Outcomes for Student Learning: What are the measurable student learning outcomes associated with these activities? Weighted Double

Missing. The proposal includes vague or student learning outcomes (SLO) that cannot be assessed.

Appropriately constructed SLO or the potential for appropriate SLO.

Clearly describes appropriately constructed SLO that can be assessed.

Assessment Methods: How will the University assess whether these activities are improving student learning outcomes?Weighted Double

Missing. Assessment methods are not complete or clearly defined; do not include direct methods of assessment; or do not include best practices.

Assessment methods are clearly defined and contain at least some direct measures of SLO. Proposal contains other measures of overall success of the QEP. Descriptions have the potential to provide valid and reliable measures.

Proposal provides multiple measures of SLOs and success and demonstrates measures are valid and reliable.

Rough Timeline for Implementation: What steps or phases would be required to implement and assess these activities? How long would this take?

Missing. Timeline is vague, cannot be implemented or completed in an appropriate time frame.

Timeline is clear and can be completed within the timeframe or has the potential to be completed within the timeframe.

Timeline is clear and can be completed within the time frame.

Estimated Resources Required: What additional staffing, faculty or staff training, equipment, or other resources would be needed to implement this plan?No weight—although scored

Missing. Poorly defined or clearly outside the scope of possibilities.

Adequately defined and the project has the potential to be accomplished with available resources.

Well defined, clearly able to support the project, and within the scope of LSU.

Since we want the strongest possible QEP for LSU, we will also be asking reviewers for strengths and weaknesses of the proposals, as well as anything that they think would improve the proposals. For those elements that are “weighted double,” please score according to the stated rubric—scores will be “weighted double” in the final analyses.

Appendices

80


Appendix D: Updating the University Community and Soliciting Feedback (continues on next page)Date Event

01.17.13 QEP Team Chair updated the SACSCOC Reaffirmation of Accreditation Steering Committee (Steering Committee) on the process of selecting the QEP; feedback was solicited.

01.25.12 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to Student Government about the reaffirmation process; feedback was solicited.

02.14.12 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to the Dean’s Council and the Faculty Senate about the reaffirmation process; feedback was solicited.

02.14.12 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to the Staff Senate about the reaffirmation process; feedback was solicited.

02.16.12 QEP Team Chair updated the Steering Committee on the process of selecting the QEP; feedback was solicited.

02.27.12 QEP Team Chair and Chair of the Steering Committee spoke at the Chancellor’s Executive Staff Meeting to update them on the reaffirmation process; feedback was solicited.

03.12.12 SACSCOC Reaffirmation Update in LSU Communiqué.

03.13.12 QEP Team Chair spoke to the Undergraduate and Graduate Student Research Workshop about the QEP; feedback was solicited.

03.20.12 QEP Team Chair spoke to the Staff Foundation Meeting about the process and progress of each committee; feedback was solicited.

03.28.12 Reveille Article on Reaffirmation Process Published

04.01.12 Solicitation for Concept Papers in LSU Communiqué.


05.17.12 QEP Team Chair and Chair of the Steering Committee spoke at the Faculty Senate to update them on the reaffirmation process and feedback on the QEP concept papers.

08.17.12 QEP Team Chair and Chair of the Steering Committee met with the Provost to update him on the progress of selecting the QEP.

08.31.12 QEP Team Chair updated the Steering Committee on the QEP; feedback was solicited.




11.21.12 QEP Chair and Chair of the Steering Committee updated the Staff Senate on the reaffirmation process; feedback was solicited.

12.05.12 QEP Chair and Chair of the Steering Committee updated the Faculty Senate on the QEP; feedback was solicited.


01.10.13 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee met with the Provost to update him on the reaffirmation process.

01.14.13 QEP Chair updated the Steering Committee on the QEP; feedback was solicited.

01.15.13 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to the Dean’s Council on the reaffirmation process; formal written feedback was solicited.

01.16.13 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to Student Government about the process and progress of each committee; feedback was solicited.

02.05.13 QEP Team Chair updated the Provost on the QEP.

02.26.13 QEP Chair updated the Steering Committee on the QEP; feedback was solicited.

03.12.13 QEP Team Chair and the Chair of the Steering Committee spoke to the Business Managers to update them on the overall reaffirmation process and the QEP.

04.01.13 Announcement of the QEP topic in LSU Communiqué.

04.18.13 QEP Team Chair met with University Relations, re: QEP marketing.

81

Appendix D: Updating the University Community and Soliciting Feedback (continued)Date Event

04.25.13 The QEP Chair updated the Steering Committee on the QEP.

06.05.13 QEP Chair updated the Steering Committee on the QEP.

08.27.13 QEP Chair and Chair of the QEP implementation committee updated the Steering Committee on the QEP.

09.04.13 QEP update in LSU Communiqué and announcement of the Research Open House March 10, 2014 and the SACSCOC site visit March 11-13, 2014.


10.10.13 QEP Implementation Chair and the Assistant Vice Chancellor, University Relations updated the Campus Communicators on the QEP. Through University Relations, a toolkit with materials to promote the QEP is available for this group.

Appendices

82


Appendix E: LSU Discover Assessment CommitteeName (pending appointment) Program/Department

Faculty member Kinesiology

Faculty member College of Science

Faculty member Agriculture

Faculty member Education

Faculty member Economics

Faculty member Accounting

Faculty member Psychology

Faculty member Theatre

Faculty member Engineering

Faculty member Art

Faculty member Political Science

Faculty member Child & Family Studies

Faculty member Coast and Environment

Bobby Matthews (ex-officio) Office of Assessment and Evaluation

Sarah Ferstel (ex-officio) Office of Undergraduate Research

83

Appendix F: LSU Discover/AACU Ethics Rubric

Benchmark Milestones Milestones Capstone Score/Level

Understanding Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts

Student only names the major theory she/he uses.

Student can name the major theory she/he uses, and is only able to present the gist of the named theory.

Student can name the major theory or theories she/he uses, can present the gist of said theory or theories, and attempts to explain the details of the theory or theories used, but has some inaccuracies.

Student names the theory or theories, can present the gist of said theory or theories, and accurately explains the details of the theory or theories used.

Ethical Issue Recognition

Student can recognize basic and obvious ethical issues but fails to grasp complexity or interrelationships.

Student can recognize basic and obvious ethical issues and grasp (incompletely) the complexities or interrelationships among the issues.

Student can recognize ethical issues when issues are presented in a complex, multilayered (gray) context OR can grasp cross-relationships among the issues.

Student can recognize ethical issues when presented in a complex, multilayered (gray) context AND can recognize cross-relationships among the issues.

Application of Ethical Perspectives/Concepts

Student can apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question with support (using examples, in a class, in a group, or a fixed-choice setting) but is unable to apply ethical perspectives/concepts independently (to a new example.).

Student can apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, independently (to a new example) and the application is inaccurate.

Student can independently (to a new example) apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, accurately, but does not consider the specific implications of the application.

Student can independently apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, accurately, and is able to consider full implications of the application.

Evaluation of Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts

Student states a position but cannot state the objections to and assumptions and limitations of the different perspectives/concepts.

Student states a position and can state the objections to, assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts but does not respond to them (and ultimately objections, assumptions, and implications are compartmentalized by student and do not affect student’s position.)

Student states a position and can state the objections to, assumptions and implications of, and respond to the objections to, assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts, but the student’s response is inadequate.

Student states a position and can state the objections to, assumptions and implications of and can reasonably defend against the objections to, assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts, and the student’s defense is adequate and effective.

Appendices

84


Appendix G: QEP Implementation CommitteeName College Affiliation Time of Appointment

Clark, Nancy Dean, Honors College · Professor of History May 17, 2013—present

Duran, Randy Director, Office of Undergraduate Research · Professor of Chemistry May 17, 2013—present

Erdman, Jori Director, School of Architecture May 17, 2013—present

Ferstel, Sarah QEP/LSU Discover Coordinator, Office of Research and Economic Development September 27 –present

McDonald, Janet Associate Dean, College of H&SS · Professor of Psychology May 17, 2013—present

Pasqua, Jason Office of Research and Economic Development May 17, 2013-- present

Smyth, Elaine Interim Dean, LSU Libraries May 17, 2013—present

Wilson, Vincent Professor, Environmental Sciences May 17, 2013—present

85

Appendix H: Marketing TimelineMarch 2013 Initial meeting with Academic Affairs to discuss marketing of the QEP

April 2013 Development of initial design concepts and names for feedback

June 2013 Selection of final name and design concept

May 2013 Brainstorming of QEP promotional ideas in Communications & University Relations

Aug.-Nov. 2013

Development of QEP promotional items, including:• Writing, design of push cards for faculty, staff, students• Design of welcome banners• Design of LSU Discover table throw• Design of LSU Discover cup• Design of LSU Discover T-shirts (4)• Design of screen shot for flat panel monitors• Design of ads for campus newspaper, The Reveille• Writing, design of table tents for dining halls• Design of window displays and elevator wraps

Sept.-Oct. 2013

Nomination, selection, promotion of LSU Discover Scholars:• Students videotaped, photographed and interviewed (one student per college)• Student bios written• Videos produced for each Discover Scholar• Tickets obtained for LSU vs Arkansas game for students and mentors; Provost to accompany• Student on-field recognition at LSU vs Arkansas football game• Banner stands created for each college, featuring their representative student• Homepage highlight story to commemorate LSU Discover Scholars’ game experience and the QEP• Commemorative photos prepared for each LSU Discover Scholar

October 2013

Development of QEP promotional toolkits for colleges• Powerpoint template• Customized college logo• Graphic standards manual• Web buttons• Assortment of official LSU Discover logos

October 2013

Student Government promotional assistance• Planning of QEP Free Speech Plaza event• QEP button on SG website• Recognition of LSU Discover Scholars at SG meetings• SG tweeting about LSU Discover• SG promoting LSU Discover at their events

Oct. 2013-Beyond

Public Relations:• LSU Magazine feature• LSU Research magazine feature• Reveille stories• Academic Affairs Communique • Button on LSU Online Catalog, LSU Office of Research & Economic Development site, and Academic Affairs site• Information about QEP in student orientation and recruitment publications• Science Café featuring LSU Discover Scholars, mentors, faculty

Sept.-Dec. 2013 Development of LSU Discover Website

Jan.-March 2014 Campuswide QEP Communication Blitz

Jan.-March 2014 Promotion of LSU Discover Research Symposium

Ongoing Meetings with grassroots audiences, Faculty & Staff Senates, Student Government, Campus Communicators, First Year Experience, etc

Appendices

86


Appendix I: Council on Co-Curricular ActivitiesName (pending appointment) Program/Department

Faculty/Staff Advisor University Relations

Faculty/Staff Advisor Greek Life

Faculty/Staff Advisor Residential Life, Director

Faculty/Staff Advisor Residential College, Faculty in Residence

LSU Discover Librarian LSU Libraries

SGA Representative Student Government

CxC Representative CxC

LSU Discover Coordinator Office of Undergraduate Research

Faculty/Staff Advisor First Year Experience

Faculty/Staff Advisor CAS, Learning Strategies Coordinator

Greek Life Student Representative Greek Life

Additional student Representative SAB, LSU Discover award winner, etc.

87

Appendix J: College Advisory BoardM.E. (Betsy) Garrison Agriculture Associate Dean

Lake Douglas Art & Design Associate Professor

Frances Lawrence Business Associate Dean

Vince Wilson Coast & Environment Professor

Warren Waggenspack Engineering Associate Dean

Ann Holmes Honors College Associate Dean

Jennifer Curry Human Sciences & Education Associate Professor

Janet McDonald Humanities & Social Sciences Associate Dean

Andrea Miller Mass Communication Associate Dean

Stephen Beck Music & Dramatic Arts Associate Dean

David Donze Science Associate Professor

James Miller Veterinary Medicine Associate Dean

Appendices

88


Appendix K: Survey of Academic Department ChairsLSU has chosen undergraduate research as its QEP for the upcoming SACS accreditation cycle. The QEP implementation committee is gathering baseline data as part of its planning procedure and the required SACS report this fall. We need and will very much appreciate your answers to these questions by May 28, 2013. Our working definition of undergraduate research: An inquiry or investigation, conducted by undergraduate students, guided by faculty, that solves a problem, makes an original intellectual contribution, or makes a creative contribution to the discipline or practice. (Modeled on the national Council of Undergraduate Research definition)Name:_____________________ Department:_____________________

Undergraduate Research within the Classroom

1. Do you have a course (methods course, lab, capstone etc.) where undergraduates do research as part of the course? Yes __ No __

2. If so, what is the course number(s)?

3. Is it/Are they a required course for your majors? Yes __ No __ If yes, which course numbers?

4. a) Is the research in the class(es) cookbook (i.e., preprogrammed, and similar every semester) or is it open ended, student driven or inquiry based (i.e., different every semester, students have choice in what is done, results not known)? Cookbook course number(s) ____ Inquiry based course number(s) ____4. b) Is research in the class(es) done in teams or as individuals? Team course number(s) ____ Individual course number(s) ____

5. Further details or comments about these classes

6. If the QEP was able to provide modest support, would there be interest in your department from the faculty to embed undergraduate research into your curriculum in general or into specific courses? Yes __ No __ Maybe __

7. Comments

Undergraduate Research – Mentorship (outside the classroom)

8. Do you have any opportunities for undergraduates to work with a faculty member to perform independent directed research? Yes __ No __

9. Do students receive either pay or course credit for this opportunity? Pay __ Credit __ Both __ Neither __

10. Do faculty mentors receive pay or course release for their service? Pay __ Release __ Both __ Neither __

11. Approximately how many students in your department would you estimate take part in undergraduate research opportunities per year? Majors ____ Non-majors ____

12. CommentsPresentation/Recognition of Undergraduate Research

13. Do students in your department who have done undergraduate research present their work at Departmental level forum Yes __ No __ If yes, estimated number ____College level forum Yes __ No __ If yes, estimated number ____ University level form Yes __ No __ If yes, estimated number ____ Discipline specific regional or national meetings Yes __ No __ If yes, estimated number ____

14. Are you aware of undergraduate research presentation forums at LSU?Yes __ No__ If yes, please name.

15. If the QEP developed a university-wide undergraduate research symposium, would your unit and students be interested in participating? Yes __ No __

89

Appendix L: Research Day Poster RubricPoster Number _________ Date _______Student Name ________________________ Summer 1st yr 2nd yr 3rd yr Senior

Criteria (1=weak; 5=strong) 1 2 3 4 5

Poster

Research Question clearly identified (Title, Abstract, and/or in Introduction) SLO4

Appropriate methods/tools/strategies utilized for data collection and analyses SLO2

Poster items appropriately cited (pictures, figures, tables, etc. taken from other sources), and Literature cited in text – SLO3

References listed in appropriate format – SLO1

Poster elements appropriate; Ease of reading (font size, color contrast, high quality figures, graphs, etc.); Balances simplicity with coverage; Not too busy, not too lean – SLO5

Presenter (author & researcher)

Can student clearly articulate how he/she came up with the project topic? SLO4

Did student explain the basis for their project with reference to background and supporting information (references)? – SLO1

Can student clearly explain, interpret, and state conclusions from his/her findings? – SLO2

Did the student allude to other people’s work (e.g. literature cited) or otherwise demonstrate responsible conduct of research? – SLO3

Can student respond to interview questions clearly and concisely? – SLO5

Did the student present his/her project in a professional manner? – SLO5

TOTALS

GRAND TOTAL

Appendices

90


Appendix M: Student Advisory BoardStudent Program/Department

Markita Lewis McNair

Vicky Kelly HHMI

Hannah McLain Mass Communication

Megan Arias Sea Grant UROP

Sarah Odom Human Sciences & Education

Matthew J. Landry Agriculture

Eric Newberry Business

Bruno Gabriel Beltran Honors College

Morgan Hargrove CCT REU

Mark DiTusa LA-SIGMA REU

Aurora Vargas NIH IMSD

Abigail Burcham CFLR

Colleen Robichaux Noyce Scholars

Tiffani Guerin ORED

91

Appendix N: General Schedule of Assessment and Related Artifacts (SLOs 2-5; continued from Table X.A)

Co-curricular activities Curricular Transformation Mentored Research

Research Day

Poster Talk

SLO2 Utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem.

Research project(s); written works; oral presentations(see QEP Critical Thinking Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, & QEP Spoken Rubric)

Lab reports; Written works; Poster &/or oral presentations; digital eportfolio(see QEP Critical Thinking Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, & QEP Spoken Rubric)

SLO3 Demonstrate awareness of responsible conduct of research.

Course quizzes/exams

Capstone Course assessment(see QEP Written Communication Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, & QEP Spoken Rubric)

(see Research day) Poster and Presenter evaluation(see QEP Poster Rubric)

Presentation evaluation(see QEP Spoken Rubric)

SLO4 Identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question.

Capstone Course assessment(see QEP Written Communication Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, & QEP Spoken Rubric)

(see Research Day) Poster and Presenter evaluation(see QEP Poster Rubric)


SLO5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance and/or oral presentation.

Capstone Course assessment; course projects/assignments; Digital portfolio(see QEP Written Communication Rubric, QEP Critical Thinking Rubric, QEP Poster Rubric, & QEP Spoken Rubric)

(see Research Day) Poster and Presenter evaluation; digital portfolio(see QEP Poster Rubric)


Appendices

92


Appendix O: Student Achievement in SLOs Rubric (continues on next page) (SLOs 2-5; continued from Table X.B)


SLO2 Utilize tools and strategies for gathering and evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem.

Technical Skills Technical skills are insufficient to utilize materials, instrumentation, devices, or programs to effectively gather data appropriate to the research project

Technical skills are generally sufficient in the use of materials, instrumentation, devices, or programs to gather data appropriate to the research project, but errors are evident

Technical skills are applied appropriately and consistently in the gathering of data without errors

Observation / Data Collection

Data, observations, and/or collected works are not relevant or sufficient to address the research question

Data, observations, and/or collected works are mostly relevant or sufficient to address the research question; some extraneous material present; limited information about data obtained

Data, observations, and/or collected works are clearly relevant or sufficient to address the research question; no extraneous material present; clear identification and information about data obtained

Analysis / Interpretation

Analysis of information, data, observations is largely inaccurate or incomplete

Analysis of information, data, observations is mostly accurate with some errors or mostly complete with minor omissions

Analysis of information, data, observations is performed accurately and completely

SLO3 Demonstrate awareness of responsible conduct of research.

Academic Integrity

Violates any aspect of LSU’s Code of Student Conduct (e.g. plagiarism, proper citation of sources, etc.)

Acknowledges and generally follows LSU’s Code of Student Conduct with guidance, but does not articulate the value of doing so

Consistently and independently follows LSU’s Code of Student Conduct, and recognizes the value of doing so

Conduct Research inquiry is performed without consideration or ethically responsible treatment of or impacts to humans or animals

Research inquiry appears to generally consider and follow ethical practices in the treatment of or impacts to humans or animals, but documentation is missing

Research inquiry fully considers and follows ethical practices in the treatment of or impacts to humans or animals with all the necessary permissions and documentation

Ethics Does not identify ethical problems, questions or issues relevant to the research inquiry

Recognizes ethical problems, questions or issues relevant to the research inquiry, but does not provide ways to alleviate these issues

Clearly recognizes ethical problems, questions or issues relevant to the research inquiry, and presents/ describes methodologies to address these issues

93

Appendix O: Student Achievement in SLOs Rubric (continued) (SLOs 2-5; continued from Table X.B)


SLO4 Identify and describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question.

Basic Skills Demonstrates limited and basic skills in the discipline; limited discipline-specific terminology and/or vocabulary

Demonstrates a working skill set and/or vocabulary in the discipline, but it is not advanced and may be used inappropriately

Demonstrates a complex skill set and/or vocabulary in the discipline that it is advanced and consistently used appropriately

Creative /Novel Student cannot identify, distinguish or generate research questions, problems, or issues within the scope of the discipline

Student identifies some questions research questions, problems, or issues in the discipline, but does not generate new ones or distinguish ones that are outside of the scope of the discipline

Student identifies and consistently distinguishes research questions, problems, or issues that are within the scope of the discipline, and generates new ones

Logic / Rationale The logic or rationale used in the research inquiry is flawed

The logic or rationale used in the research inquiry is generally appropriate, but contradictory evidence or theory(ies) may be acknowledged but not integrated into logic or rationale

The logic or rationale used in the research inquiry is clearly scholarly, and contradictory evidence or theory(ies) are integrated into logic or rationale

SLO5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance and/or oral presentation.

Clarity / Organization

Communication is disorganized, incoherent, vague or inappropriate

Communication is generally organized and clear with few errors or distractions that interfere with comprehension

Communication is clearly focused and articulated, free of errors or distractions, and easily comprehensible

Acknowledgment Communication lacks recognition of works, quotations, and/or citations in an appropriate format

Communication acknowledges works with quotations and/or citations in a suitable format, but is inconsistent

Communication clearly and consistently acknowledges works with quotations and/or citations in an appropriate format

Scholarly Presentation

Communication completely lacks scholarly base, employs incorrect or inappropriate formatting, or targets the wrong audience

Communication generally follows the correct formatting, is presented at the appropriate level, or targets the appropriate audience, but has errors or unnecessary components

Communication consistently follows the correct format, is presented at the appropriate level, or targets the appropriate audience, without errors or interfering components

Appendices

94


Appendix P: SLO and Assessment – Curricular Transformation (continued from Table X.E)




Assessed by designed exam questions, quizzes, and surveys; or by student produced research reports and works

Instructors and departments/college recipients of QEP-funding for developing research-intensive courses and degree program curricular changes

Timing dependent upon research-intensive courses and program curriculum design

Assessment data compiled and reported directly to TaskStream, and evaluated by QEP Assessment Committee

2 Utilize tools & strategies for gathering & evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem

Demonstrates appropriate use of discipline-specific technical skills in the collection of data and observations, and analysis and interpretation of the results

Rubric-based evaluation of student- produced lab reports, research reports and works

(Same as above) (Same as above) (Same as above)


Demonstrates recognition of ethical problems and issues in research inquiry; Consistent adherence with LSU’s Code of Student Conduct in reporting research results

Rubric-based Assessment of student-produced research reports and works



Demonstrates a complex skill set identifying, distinguishing, and developing new research questions, problems within the scope of the discipline

Rubric-based evaluation of student-produced lab reports, research reports and works


5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance &/or presentation

Demonstrates scholarly & articulate communication that is clear, easy to understand & follow

Rubric-based evaluation of student-produced research works

(Same as above) During Capstone course in senior year; Research Day

(Same as above)

95

Appendix P: SLO and Assessment – Mentored Research (continued from Table X.E)




Periodic Rubric-based DRF evaluation of Written works; Poster &/or oral presentations; digital eportfolio; Research Day

Assessment Committee

Spring Semester of participating years

Documents to be assessed are uploaded directly to TaskStream by the student, and evaluated by QEP Assessment Committee

2 Utilize tools & strategies for gathering & evaluating data, and apply the results to the solution of the research problem

Demonstrates appropriate use of discipline-specific technical skills in the collection of data and observations, and analysis and interpretation of the results

Rubric evaluation of student-produced biweekly research reports and reflective statements twice a semester, and of work produced in response to course assignments


During each semester student is participating in mentored research



Demonstrates recognition of ethical problems and issues in research inquiry; Consistent adherence with LSU’ Code of Student Conduct in reporting research results

Rubric-based Assessment of student-produced research reports and works


Spring Semester of Participating Years


4 Identify & describe an original disciplinary or interdisciplinary research question

Demonstrates a complex skill set identifying, distinguishing, and developing new research questions, problems within the scope of the discipline

Student produced biweekly research reports, and reflective statements twice a semester




5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance &/or presentation


Rubric-based evaluation of student-produced research works




Appendices

96


Appendix P: SLO and Assessment – Research Day (continued from Table X.E)


1

2


Demonstrates consistent adherence with LSU’ Code of Student Conduct in reporting research results (e.g. plagiarism, proper citation of sources, etc.)

Assessed by a panel of faculty by rubric driven evaluations of presentations

Panel of faculty assigned by the QEP Assessment Committee

During the Research Day events



Demonstrates a complex skill set identifying, distinguishing, and developing new research questions, problems within the

Rubric-based evaluation of student-produced lab reports, research


Research Day

5 Articulate research findings through written, visual, performance and/or oral presentation


Assessed by a panel of faculty by rubric driven evaluations of presentations

Panel of faculty assigned by the QEP Assessment Committee

During the Research Day events


97

College of Humanities & Social Sciences

College of Human Sciences & Education

98
