USF's 2015 QEP - The Global Citizens Project

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges

On-Site Reaffirmation Visit April 7-9, 2015

Quality Enhancement Plan

February 2, 2015

Dr. Cheryl CardellCommission on CollegesSouthern Association of Colleges and Schools 1866 Southern LaneDecatur, GA 30033

Dear Dr. Cardell and Members of the On-Site Reaffirmation Committee:

I am pleased to submit USF’s Quality Enhancement Plan, “The Global Citizens Project,” as part of the University’s reaffirmation of accreditation. We have been working hard for the past 20 months to develop a plan that represents the goals and values of our faculty, staff, students, and administration. I can proudly say, the Global Citizens Project is that plan.

Internationalization and global engagement have long been strategic priorities for USF. Our global commitment is reflected in our mission, faculty research, international programs, and campus diversity. Our students represent more than 150 nations around the world and play a key role in our institution’s highly productive research endeavors, as they collaborate with our esteemed faculty in the creation of new knowledge and the improvement of lives and strengthening of communities across the globe. The Global Citizens Project will extend our global commitment across the undergraduate curriculum and co-curriculum, providing our students with multiple and varied opportunities to develop the competencies of a global citizen. Our faculty and staff will also benefit from the Global Citizens Project through the many professional development activities to be offered to enhance their global knowledge and skills.

The Office of the President and senior leadership endorse this Quality Enhancement Plan and commit to providing the necessary resources to ensure the success of the Global Citizens Project. We look forward to your visit in April and eagerly await what are certain to be fruitful and helpful discussions with you about our Quality Enhancement Plan.

Sincerely,

Judy GenshaftUSF System President

cc: USF SACSCOC Leadership Team QEP Steering Committee Office of the Provost Council of Deans

Office of the USF SystemUniversity of South Florida • 4202 East Fowler Avenue • Tampa, FL 33620

www.system.usf.edu

University of South Florida The Global Citizens Project

QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN

ii

iv LIST OF APPENDICES v LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 4 I. INSTITUTIONAL PROCESS 4 A. Topic Selection Process

7 B. The Global Citizens Project Accomplishes USF’s Mission and Aligns with USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan.

10 C. The Global Citizens Project Builds on USF’s 2005 QEP.

13 D. USF’s Global Resources and Accomplishments Support Institutional Capacity for Initiating, Implementing, and Sustaining the Global Citizens Project.

14 E. Institutional Assessment Data Indicate the Need for the Global Citizens Project.

20 F. Summary

21 II. FOCUS OF THE PLAN21 A. Global Education: Definitions, Learning Outcomes, and Best Practices

25 B. Existing Global Resources, Activities, and Opportunities at USF

29 C. Our Students

33 D. The Global Citizens Project

33 I. GCP Theoretical Foundations

35 II. GCP Conceptual Framework and Student Learning Outcomes

40 III. GCP Program Goals and Objectives

51 E. Benefits to USF and Our Students

TABLE OF CONTENTS


iii

52 III. INSTITUTIONAL CAPABILITY FOR THE INITIATION, IMPLEMENTATION, AND COMPLETION OF THE PLAN52 A. GCP Administrative Structure

54 B. GCP Professional Development

56 C. GCP Budget

59 D. GCP Implementation Timeline

61 IV. BROAD-BASED INVOLVEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL CONSTITUENCIES66 V. ASSESSMENT OF THE PLAN66 A. GCP Assessment

66 I. What To Measure

68 I. How to Measure

71 III. Lessons Learned

71 B. GCP Program Evaluation

73 REFERENCES76 APPENDICES



iv

List of Appendices

76 APPENDIX A: QEP PARTICIPANTS

76 Appendix A1: QEP Steering Committee

77 Appendix A2: Faculty Focus Groups on Learning Outcomes

78 Appendix A3: QEP Curriculum Development Team

78 Appendix A4: QEP Co-Curriculum Development Team

79 Appendix A5: Academic Advisor Focus Group Participants

79 Appendix A6: AAC&U Institute on General Education and Assessment Team

79 Appendix A7: Global FKL Implementation Team

80 Appendix A8: Global Pathways Implementation Team

80 Appendix A9: Global Citizen Awards Implementation Team

81 APPENDIX B: EXPERTS’ STATEMENTS REGARDING GLOBAL CONCEPTS

83 APPENDIX C: GENERAL EDUCATION COURSES COLOR-CODED BY FKL DIMENSION

85 APPENDIX D: FKL COURSE RECERTIFICATION FORM (GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT SECTION)

88 APPENDIX E: CAPSTONE LEARNING EXPERIENCE COURSES COLOR-CODED BY FKL DIMENSION

89 APPENDIX F: NON-FKL COURSE PROPOSAL FORM (GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT SECTION)

93 APPENDIX G: GLOBAL PATHWAYS CURRICULUM MAP

94 APPENDIX H: GLOBAL PATHWAYS TEMPLATE

95 APPENDIX I: PROCESS FOR DECLARING AND COMPLETING THE GLOBAL CITIZEN AWARDS

97 APPENDIX J: SUMMARY OF STUDENT RESPONSES TO QUESTIONNAIRE ON GLOBAL CITIZEN/SHIP

99 APPENDIX K: QEP CAMPUS SURVEY: CONTENT-RELATED QUESTIONS

100 APPENDIX L: STUDENT GOVERNMENT SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION IN RECOGNITION OF THE QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN


List of Tables

15 TABLE 1. NSSE RESULTS, INCLUDING PEER AND ASPIRATIONAL COMPARISONS (2009 AND 2010)

16 TABLE 2. UNDERGRADUATE PARTICIPATION IN STUDY ABROAD (2009-2013)

16 TABLE 3. RUBRIC SCORES FOR FKL DIMENSIONS WITH A GLOBAL FOCUS (2009-2012)

18 TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF HETT GLOBAL-MINDEDNESS SCALE SCORES (2011-2014)

19 TABLE 5. GRADUATING SENIOR SURVEY RESULTS (SPRING 2013)

23 TABLE 6. GLOBAL LEARNING OUTCOMES AT OTHER INSTITUTIONS

30 TABLE 7. UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT POPULATION STATISTICS (FALL 2014, DEGREE-SEEKING)

31 TABLE 8. NEW FTIC PROFILE (FALL 2014)

32 TABLE 9. UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT IN WORLD LANGUAGE EDUCATION (2011-2014)

57 TABLE 10. GCP BUDGET

59 TABLE 11. GCP IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

72 TABLE 12. GCP PERFORMANCE METRICS

List of Figures

6 FIGURE 1. HIGHLIGHTS IN QEP DEVELOPMENT

12 FIGURE 2. EXISTING GLOBAL EMPHASES IN THE FKL CORE CURRICULUM

14 FIGURE 3. USF’S GLOBAL PROGRESSION TIMELINE

26 FIGURE 4. USF FACULTY’S GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY

34 FIGURE 5. THREE PRIMARY CONCEPTS OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP (SCHATTLE, 2008)

36 FIGURE 6. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT

38 FIGURE 7. GCP STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES FLOWCHART

41 FIGURE 8. SCHEMATIC OF GCP PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

43 FIGURE 9. GCP STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR THE FKL CORE CURRICULUM

54 FIGURE 10. GCP ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

62 FIGURE 11. QEP PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE

v



8



8

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1

programs, and 3) to provide students with opportunities to reinforce global competencies through the creation of a Global Citizen Awards program.

With a total budget of $5,000,000 over eight years, significant human and financial resources are dedicated to support student success, professional development, and assessment of the Global Citizens Project. These include study abroad scholarships, library enhancements, a suite of assessment instruments, and new hiring lines. Several new professional development opportunities, including workshops, learning communities, and a conference, will be developed to support faculty and staff in the redesign of programs and curricula.

Assessment of student learning within the Global Citizens Project relies on existing direct and indirect measures in the published literature as well as internally crafted instruments adapted to our institutional context and developmental model of global citizenship. These include the Hett Global-mindedness Scale, the Global Perspective Inventory, the Global Awareness Profile Test, and USF-developed rubrics and tests. Existing operational systems and established performance metrics related to program goals enable close monitoring of the progress of the Global Citizens Project.

The Global Citizens Project was developed over the course of a year and a half and represents the work of all university constituencies – faculty, staff, students, alumni, and administrators. Through focus groups, surveys, town halls, a dedicated website and email account, development and implementation teams, and many formal and informal presentations at various university council and committee meetings, we have created a QEP that incorporates a broad range of campus perspectives and expertise. We are excited about the Global Citizens Project and anticipate tremendous success!

The University of South Florida has developed a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) designed to prepare students to lead meaningful and productive lives in a global society.

Entitled the Global Citizens Project, USF’s QEP advances USF’s mission and strategic goals as a global research university dedicated to student success through the establishment of curricula and co-curricula that will enhance students’ global competencies and improve student perceptions of globally related institutional opportunities. The topic was selected based on USF’s mission and strategic plan, USF’s 2005 QEP, recent USF trends and successes, and institutional assessment data.

The goal of the Global Citizens Project is to develop students’ willingness and ability to engage constructively with diverse people, places, events, challenges, and opportunities – USF’s definition of a global citizen. To achieve this goal, we have constructed a testable developmental model of global citizenship focused on three competencies: 1) Global Awareness, 2) Global Responsibility, and 3) Global Participation. Accompanying learning outcomes for each competency attending to the affective/conative and cognitive domains provide measurable indicators of learning gains.

To achieve anticipated learning gains, we have defined three programmatic goals targeting the curriculum and the co-curriculum. These goals are: 1) to provide students with an introduction to global competencies through the globalization of general education and capstone course offerings, 2) to provide students with opportunities to practice and apply global competencies through the globalization of degree

INTRODUCTIONThe University of South Florida (USF) is a large, doctorate-granting research university located in metropolitan Tampa on the west coast of Florida. Classified in the top tier of research universities (RU/VH) by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, USF attracts leading scholars and promising students from around the world. Its international reach leads USF to envision itself as a “global research university dedicated to student success” (USF, 2013, p. 1). This global vision was recently affirmed when NAFSA awarded USF the 2013 Senator Paul Simon Award for Campus Internationalization. To advance USF’s internationalization and global education efforts, USF has developed a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) focused on developing students as global citizens.

2

A Bit of ContextThe 2013 Simon Award for Campus Internationalization can be viewed as the highlight of a decade-long journey toward the development of the Global Citizens Project. Over the past 10 years, faculty, administrators, staff, and students at USF have come to recognize the need to “globalize” while acknowledging the limited opportunities for faculty and students to engage globally. The growing recognition of the importance of global engagement can be seen initially in a series of disconnected administrative events and accomplishments “international” in nature. Among the faculty, the growing recognition of the importance of global engagement manifests itself in the development of USF’s 2005 QEP through the revision of general education, which added a new “global” requirement for students in 2009, followed by the development of a small globally focused general education program piloted in 2011. A major catalyst propelling USF toward increased attention on global engagement came in

2010 from a presentation to the Campus Leadership Council in which it was reported that only 1.75% of undergraduates at USF studied abroad. This simple data point was reinforced by 2009 and 2010 NSSE data showing that significantly fewer USF undergraduates reported participating in study abroad than at our Carnegie peers and aspirational AAU institutions. Major efforts to internationalize the campus ensued, leading to the creation of the administrative unit, USF World and, most recently, the revision of the university’s mission and the drafting of a new strategic plan explicitly reimagining USF as a “global research university dedicated to student success” (USF, 2013, p. 1). Yet, despite these tremendous gains, in 2013 only 57% of undergraduates reported that USF provides a globally competitive education. USF’s 2015 QEP, The Global Citizens Project, aims to change this perception and make USF’s global vision a reality for our undergraduate students.

3



4


4

I. INSTITUTIONAL PROCESS


4


4

USF used a broad-based institutional process to identify global citizenship as the focus of its 2015 QEP and to develop the plan to enhance student learning in this area. This process involved careful consideration of institutional planning and assessment efforts and input from a broad cross-section of the university community (see Figure 1 for highlights in QEP development). The topic was selected based on the following: 1) USF’s Mission and Strategic Plan, 2013-2018; 2) USF’s 2005 QEP, 3) growing trends and recent successes at USF, and 4) institutional assessment data. The topic is directly related to institutional needs, and accomplishment of the plan will directly improve institutional and student performance.

A. Topic Selection ProcessIn June 2013, Provost and Executive Vice President Ralph Wilcox appointed a QEP Steering Committee charged with overseeing the selection, development, and implementation of USF’s 2015 QEP. The QEP Steering Committee (which continues to meet regularly) is composed of 31 administrators, faculty, staff, students, and alumni from across the university. Representatives include individuals from Student Government, Student Affairs, Institutional Effectiveness, and the colleges of Arts and Sciences, Behavioral and Community Sciences, Business, Education, Engineering, Marine Science, Nursing, Public Health, and The Arts (Appendix A1). Representation from all facets of the university community was a key factor in committee composition.

The QEP Steering Committee held its first meeting on June 21, 2013, during which Provost Wilcox explained the committee’s charge. Following SACSCOC (2012) guidelines, the following points were highlighted:

• The QEP should accomplish USF’s mission and align with USF’s Strategic Plan.

• The QEP should build upon (but not duplicate) the 2005 QEP.

• The QEP should demonstrate institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and sustainability of the project.

• The QEP should be embedded within USF’s ongoing institution-wide planning and evaluation process.

Provost Wilcox provided all committee members with a copy of USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan and gave an overview of the goals outlined therein. He also highlighted relevant competencies, including critical thinking, communication, problem solving, global literacy, synthesis and application of knowledge, team work, computational literacy, entrepreneurship, and innovation. At a subsequent meeting, the committee heard from Dr. Graham Tobin, then Vice Provost for Strategic and Budget Planning, who had directed the development of USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan. He explained the process by which the Strategic Plan had been developed, emphasizing the transparent, inclusive nature of the development process. The committee was very familiar with the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan, as the university had just concluded the planning process six months prior, and agreed that strategic planning had been a positive, inclusive experience.

Following its charge, the QEP Steering Committee requested presentations and information on the 2005 QEP and institutional assessment. Dr. Janet Moore, Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Director of the 2005 QEP, provided the committee with an overview of the 2005 QEP, which focused on a redesign of general education and undergraduate research. She noted the broad faculty participation in the development of the new general



5

education curriculum and the new areas of emphasis that arose as a result. These included a new three credit-hour requirement for students in the area of Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context.

Dr. Steve RiCharde, Associate Vice President of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review, provided the committee with the detailed summary report of the results from the assessment of the new general education curriculum, “Assessing General Education: Fifth Year Report on the Quality Enhancement Plan and General Education” (RiCharde, Moore, & Wao, 2010). He also provided more current information on general education assessment and student surveys. He emphasized the importance of selecting a QEP topic based on issues arising from student learning outcomes assessment and defining measurable student learning outcomes related to the topic that can be assessed directly and supported by indirect assessment.

As a group, the QEP Steering Committee examined and discussed these data (described in more detail in the following sections) as well as the process for selecting a topic. The committee recognized that many institutions go through a one- or even two-year topic selection phase, often soliciting proposals from the university community, which are then winnowed down through an extensive vetting process. However, several factors led the committee to forgo this approach and instead make a decision based on the information provided to the committee as well as the committee’s assessment of campus trends and culture.

First, USF’s new mission and 2013-2018 Strategic Plan has a clear and strong global emphasis. (It’s been noted that the word “global” appears 34 times in the Strategic Plan!) The Strategic Plan with the new mission had been finalized just six months prior to the committee’s formation, and the planning process had been an inclusive and positive experience for the university community. The Strategic Plan is the voice of the faculty and broader university community, and so the global

emphasis weighed heavily in committee discussions. By selecting global citizenship as the topic, the 2015 QEP accomplishes the mission of the university and aligns with the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan.

Second, USF’s core curriculum, which grew out of the 2005 QEP, includes new global requirements and dimensions. As with the Strategic Plan, the development of the QEP involved extensive faculty input, and so the new global aspects incorporated into the curriculum by faculty factored into committee discussions. By selecting global citizenship as the topic, the 2015 QEP builds on the 2005 QEP.

Third, the QEP Steering Committee’s own discussions about potential topics repeatedly turned to “global.” Recent trends, initiatives, university awards, and faculty achievements are distinctly global and international in focus. The new administrative unit, USF World, designed specifically to advance USF’s global aspirations, was recently established. By selecting global citizenship as the topic, USF has institutional support to initiate, implement, and sustain the 2015 QEP.

Finally, and most importantly, it became clear that while globally focused assessment data exist, more robust methods of assessment specifically targeting well-defined global competencies were needed in order for USF to achieve its new Strategic Plan goals and accomplish its mission as “a global research university dedicated to student success.” By selecting global citizenship as the topic, the 2015 QEP becomes embedded in institution-wide planning and evaluation processes.

In short, the committee was confident that the university community supported a global theme. Thus, on August 20, 2013, the QEP Steering Committee unanimously voted to select The Global Citizens Project as USF’s 2015 QEP.


6


Mission and Strategic Plan 2005 QEP USF Trends Assessment

• Mission: ensure student success in a global environment

• Vision: global research university dedicated to student success

• Goal 1: prepare well-educated and highly skilled global citizens

• General Education: new Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context core requirement

• FKL Core Curriculum: new Global Context and Human and Cultural Diversity dimensions

• Creation of USF World

• 2013 Senator Paul Simon Award for Campus Internationalization

• Honorable Mention: IIE Andrew Heiskell Award for International Partnerships

• Human and Cultural Diversity rubric scores

• Global Context rubric scores

• Hett Global-mindedness Scale

• NSSE

• Graduating Senior Survey

Global FKL Global Citizen Awards Global Pathways

• Global FKL Implementation Team

• General Education Council

• Pilots

• Global Citizen Awards Implementation Team

• Student Government focus groups

• Pilots

• Global Pathways Implementation Team

• Undergraduate Council

• Pilots

ASSESSMENT

• Course-embedded assessments

• Global Awareness Profile

• Global Perspective Inventory • Hett Global-mindedness Scale

INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY

• Budget

• Administrative Structure

• Implementation Timeline

• Performance Metrics

• Professional Development

• Marketing/communication

Global Citizens Project

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES

• Literature review

• Other QEPs

• QEP Steering Committee brainstorming

• Student questionnaire

• Faculty focus groups

• USF general education curriculum

PROGRAM GOALS

• Campus-wide survey

• Town halls

• Curriculum

Development Team

• Co-curriculum Development Team

• Academic Advisor focus group

IMPLEM

ENTATIO

N D

EVELOPM

ENT

Fall 2014 - Spring 2015FO

CUS D

EVELOPM

ENT

Fall 2013 - Summ

er 2014TO

PIC SELECTION

Summ

er 2013

FIGURE 1. HIGHLIGHTS IN QEP DEVELOPMENT



7

B. The Global Citizens Project Accomplishes USF’s Mission and Aligns with USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan. From spring 2011 through fall 2012, USF engaged in a university-wide strategic planning process, which resulted in the revision of the university’s mission, vision, and values, as well as the development of four new institutional goals. The mission of USF is now to “deliver competitive undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs, to generate knowledge, foster intellectual development, and ensure student success in a global environment” (USF, 2013, p. 8). USF envisions itself as “a global research university dedicated to student success.” As an institution, we value “diversity of students, faculty, and staff;” “global research, community engagement, and public service;” and “a campus life with broad academic, cultural, and athletic opportunities” (p. 8). The new mission and accompanying vision and values reflect the evolution of USF from an institution whose primary purpose in 1985 was to serve the Tampa Bay region to one focused on “student success in a global environment” in the 21st century.

To accomplish its new mission, USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan outlines four goals that describe a commitment to the graduation of globally oriented citizens; faculty and student researchers dedicated to applied research that promotes globally relevant solutions; and excellence in innovation and entrepreneurship that secures Florida’s place in the global economy. Each goal includes a statement of commitment and a set of objectives that highlight global citizenship and engagement. Below are excerpts taken directly from the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan (USF, 2013). Items relevant to global citizenship have been underlined.

USF Strategic Plan Goal One: Well-educated and highly skilled global citizens through our continuing commitment to student success.

Commitment statement: The university is committed to delivering high quality globally informed academic programs that prepare our graduates for leadership roles both at home and abroad.

RELEVANT OBJECTIVES:• Provide the highest quality, comprehensive, interdisciplinary educational programs and student

research opportunities to foster critical thinking and intellectual inquiry through a variety of pedagogical and delivery methods

• Develop diverse, dynamic global citizens and leaders to strengthen communities and improve quality of life

• Enhance opportunities for all students by providing transformational learning — including an increased commitment to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and health fields — that is intellectually, scientifically, and technologically sound and produces relevant applied skills and engaged outcomes

• Educate competitive, highly skilled students prepared to excel in the global job market and to make meaningful and lasting contributions to society

• Deliver a globalized curriculum utilizing emerging technologies to increase accessibility and cultural understanding


8


USF Strategic Plan Goal Two: High-impact research and innovation to change lives, improve health, and foster sustainable development and positive societal change.

Commitment statement: The university prizes the responsibility of placing the academic experience of our students, the productivity of our faculty, and the creativity of our staff in the global context. The university will remain relevant and engaged, and will fulfill a leadership role in addressing critical global issues with technologies that have yet to be imagined.

RELEVANT OBJECTIVES: • Engage in high-impact research, scholarship, and creative activities that generate new knowledge

• Increase global research opportunities and partnerships at all levels within the university

• Develop strategic interdisciplinary research initiatives that solve critical problems

• Promote community-engaged scholarship and creative activities to benefit all members of society

USF Strategic Plan Goal Three: A highly effective, major economic engine, creating new partnerships to build a strong and sustainable future for Florida in the global economy.

Commitment statement: The university seeks to build robust, innovative partnerships bridging our local and international communities to strengthen the Tampa Bay region as part of the global landscape.

RELEVANT OBJECTIVES:• Provide university stewardship that represents the cornerstone of economic and cultural

significance for Florida, the nation, and beyond

• Promote a stimulating campus life through diverse academic, economic, cultural, and athletic opportunities

USF Strategic Plan Goal Four: Sound financial management to establish a strong and sustainable economic base in support of USF’s continued academic advancement.

Commitment statement: The university will seek to provide a more secure economic base, greater operational and resource efficiencies, increased transparency in its business practices, and heightened accountability as it pursues the institution’s global education and research goals.

RELEVANT OBJECTIVES:• Promote and sustain a positive working environment, high service quality, and strong staff support

through competitive salary structures and professional development opportunities

• Expand USF’s international identity through design and implementation of a comprehensive, powerful branding campaign



9

As is evident from the above excerpts, global citizenship and global engagement are emphasized throughout USF’s Strategic Plan. These emphases represent the values and goals of the university community, as the development of the Strategic Plan was a fully engaged, transparent process. To illustrate the inclusive nature of the planning process, we describe the development of the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan below.

The development of the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan was spearheaded by a Strategic Planning Committee. This 39-member Strategic Planning Committee included representatives from all constituent groups: students, faculty, staff, alumni, as well as “voices” from Student Government, the Faculty Senate, the Staff Senate, the Administrative and Professional Council, the USF Foundation, the USF Board of Trustees, and the broader Tampa Bay community. Dr. Graham Tobin, then Vice Provost for Strategic and Budget Planning, directed the planning process.

The first step in the planning process was to revisit the mission of USF in order to reposition the university for the future and to align the institutional mission with the State University System (SUS) mission, as established by the SUS 2012-2025 Strategic Plan. Careful to maintain USF’s unique character and contribution to the SUS, the Strategic Planning Committee rewrote the mission to align more closely with the new SUS mission, build on the momentum of the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan, and reflect the current direction of the institution, namely an emphasis on global engagement and student success. The strategic planning development process continued throughout the 2011-2012 academic year. The Vice Provost for Strategic and Budget Planning conducted

a web-based survey and distributed the results to the Strategic Planning Committee to review the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the 2007-2012 plan. The Committee broke into various subgroups to debate goals and initiatives. Based on the subcommittee work, in spring 2012, the Vice Provost for Strategic and Budget Planning formulated a provisional draft and launched a strategic planning website (defunct after publication of the 2013-2018 Strategic Plan) that posted documents associated with the plan, performance metrics, the draft plan itself, and a mechanism for gathering feedback. The Vice Provost for Strategic and Budget Planning presented the draft plan to 19 different units, including all college assemblies. The presentations resulted in additional feedback that was incorporated into a revised draft, which added some additional goals. At this time, the Vice Provost for Planning and Analysis in conjunction with the Strategic Planning Committee linked the broad objectives of the plan in a single planning document. The Strategic Planning Committee finalized the plan in the summer and fall of 2012 and submitted it for approval by the Board of Trustees in December 2012.

The USF 2013-2018 Strategic Plan differs significantly from its predecessors. The plan encapsulates “the pressing need to provide broad access to higher education while maintaining affordability and high-quality education within a changing economic reality brought on by significantly reduced state support” (USF, 2013). The new mission statement emphasizes global engagement and student success, as do the four goals outlined in the plan. The 2013-2018 Strategic Plan was therefore a key factor in the selection of the Global Citizens Project as USF’s 2015 QEP.


10


C. The Global Citizens Project Builds on USF’s 2005 QEP.USF’s 2005 QEP was INSPIRE: Infusing and Nurturing the Skills and Practice of Inquiry and Research in Education (USF, 2005). The broad goal of the 2005 QEP was to improve students’ intellectual skills related to inquiry and research through a complete revision of general education as well as the establishment of an office dedicated exclusively to promoting and supporting undergraduate research. The scope of the 2005 QEP was admittedly broad, however, its development involved an inclusive process and resulted in a general education curriculum representative of the values of the USF faculty, which include an emphasis on global and cultural perspectives.

Fully implemented in 2009, the new general education curriculum, entitled the Foundations of Knowledge and Learning (FKL) Core Curriculum, is designed to ensure breadth of knowledge and intellectual inquiry, incorporating student learning outcomes consistent with the university’s mission and vision. A central feature of the program is to engage students with a diversity of ideas, concepts, and ways of acquiring knowledge.

The FKL’s philosophical underpinnings rest on a 2009 statement developed by the General Education Council: “The Foundations of Knowledge and Learning Core Curriculum emphasizes inquiry as the means of developing complex intellectual skills that enable students to become critical thinkers, concerned citizens, successful professionals, and reflective people who throughout their lives are aware of, understand, and engage with the complexities and challenges that our global realities require. The program is designed to produce university graduates who will:

• understand symbolic, expressive, and interpretive communication systems in all of their complexities; • confront with an inquiring mind the natural, social, technical, and human world, and their interrelationships; • understand theories and methodologies for producing knowledge and evaluating information; • interpret and understand human diversity in a global context; and • discover and pursue a meaningful life, as well as being a responsible steward of the human and physical environment” (USF, 2009).

This philosophy is reflected in the structure of the curriculum. The FKL Core Curriculum consists of lower-level general education courses (36 required credits) and upper-level Capstone Learning Experience courses (6 required credits). Lower-level courses are organized into seven core areas:

A. English Composition (6 credits) B. Fine Arts (3 credits) C. Humanities (6 credits) D. Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context (3 credits) E. Mathematics and Quantitative Reasoning (6 credits) F. Physical and Life Sciences (6 credits) G. Social and Behavioral Sciences (6 credits)

Importantly, the core area, Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context, is a new requirement for students that emerged from the redesign of the general education curriculum. The description of this core area requirement found in Figure 2 illustrates the importance faculty place on a global perspective.



11

The FKL Core Curriculum is further organized around a set of 14 dimensions or areas of emphasis, which include intellectual strategies, approaches to knowledge and processes of acquiring knowledge, perspectives and their contexts, and the basic academic competencies required of all baccalaureate degrees. The dimensions are as follows:

1. Critical Thinking2. Inquiry 3. Scientific Processes 4. Creative & Interpretive Processes and Experiences 5. Global Context 6. Human Historical Context & Process 7. Environmental Perspectives

The dimensions woven into the FKL Core Curriculum provide additional opportunities for students to develop fundamental knowledge and skills in a variety of core areas. For example, a course in Fine Arts may address Human and Cultural Diversity in addition to Creative and Interpretive Processes and Experiences. It is important to note then that the dimensions of Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context are salient for global citizenship (Figure 2) and are new components of USF’s general education curriculum emerging from the 2005 QEP.

With an initial global emphasis established in the core curriculum, USF sought to explore the potential of an explicitly global general education curriculum. Thus, in 2010 a small pilot general education program was developed as part of USF’s successful application to the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Shared Futures: General Education for a Global Century initiative. Entitled USF’s Global Citizenship General Education (GCGE) Program, this pilot was designed as an exciting and innovative way for first-year students to fulfill general education requirements and earn a study abroad scholarship. In the GCGE Program, students join a small cohort of GCGE students who together take a set of globally focused general education courses, participate in on-campus global and cultural events, engage in community service, and study abroad on a $2,000 scholarship. The goal of the GCGE Program is to increase students’ foundational knowledge of global processes and cultural diversity. Launched in 2011, the GCGE Program has graduated 89 students over three years. This program will conclude at the end of spring 2015 as focus turns toward the Global Citizens Project.

The increasing trend toward a global emphasis in USF’s curriculum can be seen with the development of the FKL Core Curriculum, which occurred in 2005-2009, and the smaller pilot program that launched in 2011. The new core area requirement in Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context and the new dimensions of Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context make it clear that USF faculty value, and desire for our undergraduates to attain, the knowledge and skills that are central to being a global citizen. The Global Citizens Project builds on the foundation created by the 2005 QEP, incorporating lessons learned from the GCGE Program, to focus the FKL Core Curriculum more intentionally on global citizenship.

8. Human and Cultural Diversity 9. Ethical Perspectives 10. Inter-relationships among Disciplines 11. Written Language Skills 12. Oral Language Skills 13. Information Literacy 14. Quantitative Literacy


12


FIGURE 2. EXISTING GLOBAL EMPHASES IN THE FKL CORE CURRICULUM

CORE AREA: Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context

Courses in this core area should apply principles and theories to the understanding of global processes and phenomena in an interdisciplinary manner… develop an understanding of prevailing world conditions and trends, create an awareness of the diversity of cultures and their roles in the global political economy, foster knowledge of the interrelations among global economic, political, environmental and social systems, and create an awareness of the problems confronting cultural groups, nations, and the human species as a whole.

DIMENSION: Global Context

DIMENSION: Human and Cultural Diversity

Learning Outcome: Students will demonstrate an understanding of the complexity and dynamic nature of local and global processes.

Learning Outcome: Students will demonstrate an understanding of the diversity of human experiences.

The Global Context focuses on the process referred to as globalization, that is, the process through which the magnitude and rate of the movement of people, production processes, capital, goods, services, ideas, and information across national boundaries are being intensified. The process of globalization includes the impact that the movement of peoples and the internationalization of production for the global market have on the natural and cultural environment. Students should become familiar with the structure of the global system and the various forms of inequity that it entails, as well as the contending socially positioned views of people globally regarding the effects and value of globalization. The importance of understanding the process of globalization lies in the fact that it is changing the social, economic, cultural, and environmental character of all societies. The study of such changes is related to all other areas of study in the General Education curriculum, especially to the understanding of environmental, cultural, economic, gender, and social diversity.

The goal of courses in human and cultural diversity should be to treat the phenomenon as an inherent part of the human condition, and not merely as a contemporary social or political anomaly. Students should be exposed to a basic understanding of the interplay of biological and cultural diversity in the evolution of the human species. This knowledge should form the foundation for an in-depth understanding of cultural, “racial,” linguistic, gender, and social diversity in modern societies. Knowledge of biological and ecological diversity should be followed by historically based material on the distribution and movement of cultural and biological diversity globally, and the link between culture, geography, and the development of different economic systems, including the development of capitalism. Students should understand cultural, ethnic, “racial,” linguistic, and gender diversity in the West, including in the United States, as the product of the historical interaction between human agency and natural environment.



13

D. USF’s Global Resources and Accomplishments Support Institutional Capacity for Initiating, Implementing, and Sustaining the Global Citizens Project.

The global goals and values of the university are manifest in the many global activities and achievements of the university. The highest honor was bestowed upon USF in 2013 just three months prior to the formation of the QEP Steering Committee. On February 28, 2013, it was announced that NAFSA awarded USF the 2013 Senator Paul Simon Award for Campus Internationalization, which recognizes significant international engagement, student programming, faculty development, and partnerships. USF was also selected by the Institute of International Education (IIE) as the Honorable Mention for the 2013 Andrew Heiskell Award for International Partnerships, which recognizes strategic, comprehensive, and innovative international partnership efforts. The awards can be seen as the culmination of a nearly 10-year trajectory toward increased capacity for, and engagement with, authentic global activities (Figure 3). Highlights from the earlier part of USF’s global progression include an $18 million gift from Drs. Kiran and Pallavi Patel to construct the Dr. Kiran C. Patel Center for Global Solutions in 2005, USF’s classification as Community Engaged by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 2006, USF’s opening of the first Confucius Institute in Florida in 2008, and a $1 million gift from USF President, Dr. Judy Genshaft, and Dr. Steven Greenbaum in 2008 to create the Genshaft/Greenbaum Passport Scholars Fund, which provides financial support to USF students who study abroad.

Following these exciting but disconnected events, USF began a concerted effort in 2009 to research and analyze how to make USF more globally diverse, engaged, and competitive. For a period of nine months, more than 60 USF faculty, staff, and students met as the USF World Task Force. The task force, led by Dr. Linda Whiteford, then Associate Vice President for Global Strategies, and Dr. Donna Petersen, Dean of the College of Public Health and then Interim Senior Vice President for USF Health, assessed current strengths and limitations in USF’s ability to provide students, faculty, and staff with meaningful and exciting paths for global engagement. The task force goal was to recommend the policies, strategies, and procedures needed to make USF the destination for those committed to global engagement. One of the task force’s primary recommendations was the creation of a centralized, coordinating unit for global engagement. Thus, in 2010 USF World was established.

USF World is the administrative unit responsible for internationalizing the USF System. The goals of USF World are “to promote a global culture at USF, globalize student success, enhance global initiatives within the university system, and deepen global engagement with the Tampa Bay community.” To achieve these goals, USF World provides various resources for faculty, staff, and students, including a Global Discovery database documenting faculty international activities, and access to Going Global, an employment and career resources portal. USF World also houses the Education Abroad Office and International Student Services. Led by Dr. Roger Brindley, Vice Provost and USF System Associate Vice President for Global Engagement, USF World is firmly entrenched at the highest administrative levels.

USF’s increasing trend toward global engagement over the past decade has established a firm base upon which to build a globally focused QEP. USF World, along with the many college-level global resources (described in Section II Focus of the Plan), provide a myriad of opportunities and strong institutional support for successful initiation, implementation, and sustainability of the Global Citizens Project.

University of South Florida The Global Citizens ProjectUniversity of South Florida The Global Citizens Project

14


FIGURE 3. USF’S GLOBAL PROGRESSION TIMELINE

E. Institutional Assessment Data Indicate the Need for the Global Citizens Project.

Institutional assessment data confirm the need for programming to foster and enhance a global perspective among our students, supporting the appropriateness of the Global Citizens Project as USF’s 2015 QEP. These data resulted from both direct and indirect measures, including standardized tests and course-embedded assessments using rubric-based instruments within the FKL Core Curriculum. Other indicators include low participation in study abroad and student responses to “satisfaction” surveys. Below we report on the data available to the QEP Steering Committee in summer 2013 during the topic selection phase.

National Survey of Student Engagement (2009-2010)

The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) was the first indicator that students at USF were not being prepared sufficiently for a global environment. Results from 2009 and 2010, shown in Table 1, indicated low scores on key items related to global citizenship, and that USF seniors performed consistently lower than our benchmark groups. Differences between freshmen and seniors at USF also suggested that, upon entering the university, students perceived USF to be encouraging of diversity, but this perception seemed to change over the course of their academic career at USF. NSSE data also revealed the extremely low self-reported participation in study abroad. (Note the legend indicating the color-coded scoring).

World Task Force

Global Academic Partners Program

Development of FKL Core Curriculum with new global requirements and dimensions USF Strategic Planning 2013-2018 Strategic Plan:

Global Research University

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Global Citizenship General Education Program

• N

AFS

A a

war

ds U

SF th

e Se

nato

r Pau

l Sim

on A

war

d fo

r

Cam

pus

Inte

rnat

iona

lizat

ion

• IIE

aw

ards

USF

Hon

orab

le M

entio

n fo

r And

rew

Hei

skel

l Aw

ard

for I

nter

natio

nal P

artn

ersh

ips

• Th

e G

loba

l Citi

zens

Pro

ject

sel

ecte

d as

USF

’s 2

015

QEP

• $1

M g

ift fr

om P

res.

Gen

shaf

t and

Dr.

Gre

enba

um

to c

reat

e Pa

sspo

rt S

chol

ars

Fund

• U

SF s

elec

ted

to p

artic

ipat

e in

AAC

&U

Gen

eral

Educ

atio

n fo

r a G

loba

l Cen

tury

Initi

ativ

e

• Pr

es. G

ensh

aft a

ppoi

nted

Cha

ir fo

r the

Am

eric

an

Cou

ncil

on E

duca

tion

• IN

TO U

SF p

artn

ersh

ip e

stab

lishe

d

• O

peni

ng o

f Con

fuci

us In

stitu

te, t

he fi

rst i

n Fl

orid

a

• U

SF W

orld

est

ablis

hed

• C

arne

gie

clas

sifie

s U

SF a

s C

omm

unity

Eng

aged

• $1

8M g

ift to

con

stru

ct D

r. Ki

ran

C. P

atel

Cen

ter f

or G

loba

l Sol

utio

ns

• U

SF p

artic

ipat

es in

AC

E In

tern

atio

naliz

atio

n La

bora

tory



15

TABLE 1. NSSE RESULTS, INCLUDING PEER AND ASPIRATIONAL COMPARISONS (2009 AND 2010)

NSSE 2009 NSSE 2010

Red Cell = USF less effective at p>.001

Green Cell = USF more effective at p>.001 USF

AAU Institutions

Carnegie Peers USF

AAU Institutions

Carnegie Peers

Class Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean

In your experience at your institution during the current school year, about how often have you done each of the following? 1=Never, 2=Sometimes, 3=Often, 4=Very Often

Academic and Intellectual Experiences

Had serious conversations with students who differ from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political

opinions, or personal values

FY 2.78 2.82 2.80 2.83 2.74 2.71

SR 2.71 2.87 2.83 2.75 2.85 2.81

To what extent does your institution emphasize each of the following? 1=Very little, 2=Some, 3=Quite a bit, 4=Very muchInstitutional Environment

Encouraging contact among students from different

economic, social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds

FY 2.84 2.77 2.75 2.96 2.81 2.76

SR 2.48 2.52 2.49 2.53 2.58 2.54

To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in the following areas? 1=Very little, 2=Some, 3=Quite a bit, 4=Very much

Educational and Personal Growth

Understanding people of other racial and ethnic

backgrounds

FY 2.76 2.72 2.70 2.77 2.72 2.69

SR 2.63 2.65 2.64 2.63 2.74 2.69

Which of the following have you done or do you plan to do before you graduate from your institution? (Recoded 0=have not decided, do not plan to do, plan to do; 1=done. Thus the mean is the proportion responding “done” among all valid respondents.)


16


TABLE 2. UNDERGRADUATE PARTICIPATION IN STUDY ABROAD (2009-2013)

TABLE 3. RUBRIC SCORES FOR FKL DIMENSIONS WITH A GLOBAL FOCUS (2009-2012)

Study Abroad Participation (2009-2013)

NSSE data indicating low undergraduate participation in study abroad were confirmed with actual percentages of degree-seeking undergraduates who studied abroad (Table 2). The percentage has increased slowly over time with significant recruitment and expansion efforts by the Education Abroad Office. However, as of 2013 the numbers still fell short of USF’s strategic planning goals, which set a target of 2.85% for 2013.

General Education Assessment (2009-2012)

Assessment of the recently added dimensions of Global Context and Human and Cultural Diversity in the general education curriculum revealed the inadequacy of methods being used to assess student learning in these two areas. In 2009, rubrics had been developed internally for each of these dimensions and were calibrated for internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. Each rubric was found to meet or exceed the minimum thresholds for internal consistency (threshold = α > 0.7; actual α = 0.83) and inter-rater reliability (threshold = r > 0.7; actual r = 0.90). The rubrics were used to assess student work in general education courses from 2009-2010 (Global Context) and 2009-2012 (Human and Cultural Diversity). Table 3 presents the results. The Global Context rubric consisted of three criteria on a four-point scale (12 points possible). The Human and Cultural Diversity rubric consisted of two criteria on a four-point scale (8 points possible).

2009 2010 2011 2012

FKL Dimension N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean

Global Context 78 5.96 137 5.27 -- -- -- --

Human / Cultural Diversity 61 5.11 53 6.74 284 5.97 219 6.68

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

N Mean N Mean N Mean N Mean

Undergraduates engaged in an overseas academic experience 526 1.75% 574 1.90% 719 2.46% 781 2.64%

*Numerator: USF Tampa degree-seeking students in credit- and non-credit-bearing programs, unduplicated / Denominator: USF Tampa degree-seeking undergraduate student fall unduplicated head)



17

While each rubric was found to meet or exceed thresholds for internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, a factor analysis using a principal axis solution (recommended for Likert scale data, the items of which are inter-correlated) with varimax rotation indicated that the rubrics were measuring a single construct rather than the two and three sub-constructs for which they were designed. The initial factor, the so-called g factor, accounted for 25% of the total variance and was the only factor exceeding the default SPSS eigenvalue of 1.0. Furthermore, the rubric scores were found to correlate significantly with grades indicating that the rubrics were better predictors of grades than the underlying constructs. The rubrics clearly did not reflect the complexity of global thinking and therefore are not considered a robust measure. In 2011, the Global Context rubric was abandoned in favor of the Hett Global-mindedness Scale.

Hett Global-mindedness Scale (2011-2013)

With the development of the Global Citizenship General Education Program, the opportunity to explore at a deeper level the impact of a globalized curriculum became possible. However, our assessment instruments were insufficient to establish differences between students participating in the Global Citizenship General Education Program (GCGE cohorts) and general students not participating in the GCGE Program (non-GCGE cohorts). Working with the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, an instrument called the Hett Global-mindedness Scale was selected to measure the difference between GCGE cohorts’ and non-GCGE cohorts’ self-perceptions of global-mindedness. The Hett Global-mindedness Scale is designed to assess student attitudes before and after classroom experiences or participation in study abroad programs (Hett, 1993). The assessment consists of 30 items representing five factors: Responsibility, Cultural Pluralism, Efficacy, Globalcentrism, and Interconnectedness. Prior research on the Hett Scale indicated that the instrument has strong reliability and validity, and factor-analytic studies showed that the instrument measured five subscales (Hett, 1993).

The Hett Scale was administered to entering GCGE cohorts (first-semester freshmen) and non-GCGE cohorts (general students) from 2011-2014. Prior to executing a principal axis analysis and oblique rotation on the USF data set, a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy and a Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity were used to test the appropriateness of the data set for this analysis. A KMO of .919 and a significant Bartlett’s (sig. of .000) indicated the appropriateness of the procedure. However, a principle axis analysis on the USF sample (n=463) indicated that there was a single underlying construct. As in the case of the rubrics, only one significant factor explaining approximately 25% of the overall variance emerged. Two other factors met the eigenvalue threshold of 1.0, but these had significant factor loadings on only one item each. The anticipated subscales did not emerge as separate factors even after using oblique factor rotation. (An oblique rotation with Δ = .25 was utilized as many of the response patterns to items were curvilinear and inter-correlated). Therefore, we used only total score to analyze the distinction between the GCGE cohorts and non-GCGE cohorts and found that, using ANOVA with a Tukey’s posthoc analysis, the GCGE cohort samples were consistently higher on the Hett Scale than the non-GCGE cohort samples (Table 4). This suggests that significant efforts need to be made to reach out to our general students, for the data suggest that students who take advantage of the GCGE program enter the university instilled with a broader global perspective than general students who have attend the university for at least a year. However, given that the subscales of the Hett Global-mindedness Scale did not emerge as separate factors, it is also clear that we must find still better instruments to measure self-perceptions.


18

III. INSTITUTIONAL CAPABILITY

TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF HETT GLOBAL-MINDEDNESS SCALE SCORES (2011-2014)Tukey HSDa,b

Subset for alpha = 0.05

N 1 2 3

Non-GCGE cohort spring 2014 134 111.83

Non-GCGE cohort spring 2011 85 113.04 113.04

Non-GCGE cohort spring 2013 222 114.31 114.31

GCGE cohort fall 2012 16 121.25 121.25

GCGE cohort fall 2013 73 124.55

GCGE cohort fall 2011 23 124.65

Sig. .957 .055 .851

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 41.838. b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.



19

Graduating Senior Survey (2013)

The final piece of evidence supporting the need for the Global Citizens Project is the Graduating Senior Survey. As students graduate from the university, they are prompted to complete the Graduating Senior Survey. The survey has evolved over the years, and until 2012 results were aggregated for all USF System institutions (Tampa, St. Petersburg, Sarasota-Manatee, and Lakeland). As of 2013, it is possible to extract responses for USF Tampa students. The spring 2013 results indicate that while students agree that USF is a diverse university (87.4%), only 57% of undergraduates believe USF provides a globally competitive education (Table 5). Also, while 75.3% believe USF contributed to their understanding of people from diverse cultures and backgrounds, fewer (67%) believe USF contributed to their ability to understand global issues and problems facing the world.

Given that USF’s new Strategic Plan specifically states the preparation of “well-educated and highly skilled global citizens” as Goal #1, improved student performance and more robust measures of student learning in the area of global citizenship are needed.

TABLE 5. GRADUATING SENIOR SURVEY RESULTS (SPRING 2013)

Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements: N

Composite Disagree

Strongly Disagree

1 2 3 4

Strongly Agree

5Composite

Agree

USF is a diverse university. 2679 2.5% 0.7% 1.9% 10.0% 36.5% 51.0% 87.4%

USF provides a globally competitive education. 2677 10.6% 2.8% 7.8% 32.5% 34.7% 22.3% 57.0%

To what extent do you feel your experiences at USF contributed to your growth and development in each of the following areas? N

Composite Negative Side of Scale

None1 2 3 4

A Great Deal

5

Composite Positive Side of Scale

Your understanding of people from diverse cultures and backgrounds.

2609 2.5% 2.1% 5.1% 17.5% 34.7% 40.6% 75.3%

Your ability to understand global issues and problems facing the world.

2601 10.6% 2.5% 6.7% 23.4% 34.9% 32.4% 67.4%


20


F. SummaryGlobal citizenship emerged as a key issue based on USF’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan, general education revisions completed as part of USF’s 2005 QEP, USF’s global activities and accomplishments, and USF’s institutional assessment data. Goal #1 of the university’s Strategic Plan is to prepare “well-educated and highly skilled global citizens through our continuing commitment to student success” (USF, 2013, p. 11). The Global Citizens Project is our opportunity to define for ourselves what it means to be a global citizen and to develop supporting university-wide learning outcomes. USF’s redesigned general education program includes new global requirements and underlying global dimensions. The Global Citizens Project is our opportunity to focus the general education curriculum more intentionally on global citizenship and to bring coherence to the general education experience. In this way, we can build on the successes of our 2005 QEP. USF’s prolonged and extensive global engagement and resources provide a strong foundation for continued institutional capacity building. The Global Citizens Project is our opportunity to integrate the curriculum into these existing and ongoing efforts. Institutional assessment data indicate satisfactory performance on two relevant global dimensions but highlight the need for more robust measures of student learning in this area. The Global Citizens Project is our opportunity to strengthen and embed global citizenship within USF’s institutional planning and evaluation process. Accomplishment of the QEP will therefore directly improve institutional performance and student learning through advancement of Goal #1 of the Strategic Plan, integration of the curriculum into global engagement, refinement of the assessment process, and ultimately integration of global measures into institutional effectiveness processes.

The Global Citizens Project is

our opportunity to define for

ourselves what it means to be

a global citizen and to develop

supporting university-wide

learning outcomes.



21


21

II. FOCUS OF THE PLAN


21


21

Global education is a key strategic priority for USF and a critical issue for the world today. The world has been irrevocably changed by the transnational and transcultural interactions facilitated by technological innovation, free enterprise, and human curiosity. Globalization has touched every aspect of the human experience, redefining everything from manifestations of power to artistic expression, health outcomes to the concept of citizenship. The set of social processes that change forms of human contact, as Steger (2009) defined globalization, also creates an interconnection and interdependence of the world’s economies, politics, cultures, and environment. A thriving economy in the 21st century requires creativity, adaptability, and innovative thinking, all of which are enhanced through diverse collaborations. Systems of global governance have made leadership an internationalized process, in which global understanding and competence are prerequisites for success. USF endeavors to produce students who understand the complex relationships and demands of an increasingly global context so that they are prepared to lead meaningful and productive lives in a global society.

A. Global Education: Definitions, Learning Outcomes, and Best Practices Institutions of higher education across the U.S. and beyond recognize the growing need to educate “globally competent” students. Significant efforts are therefore being invested in “internationalizing” campuses and curricula. Through “global learning” students will develop “global awareness” and “intercultural competence,” among a host of other skills and abilities. Terms related to global education abound. Appendix B provides experts’ statements on relevant global concepts consulted during the QEP process. Below, several key concepts are discussed in more detail.

An essential first distinction to make is between internationalization and globalization. Although the terms are often used interchangeably, there are differences in their meaning (Hovland, 2014b; Olson, Green, & Hill, 2006; Scott, 2000). The term internationalization refers to the interactions between nation-states, including their diplomatic relations and role of international agencies within and between them, whereas globalization goes beyond territorial borders to address issues mediated through contemporary culture and technology. Traditionally, the internationalization of higher education has focused on issues of imperialism and the context of a nation-state (Scott, 2000). However, as the free market, science, public health, security, human rights issues, and even popular culture transcend divisions of the nation-state, it has become clear that this focus is insufficient on its own to address an evolving global context. For this reason, the Maastricht Global Education Declaration of 2002 sought a broader focus through which to address global issues in education, promoting a global education that “opens people’s eyes to the realities of the globalized world and awakens them to bring about a world of greater justice, equity, and Human Rights for all” (O’Loughlin & Wegimont, 2002). This broader focus is the basis of contemporary conceptions of global learning increasingly being adopted in higher education. Internationalization within the context of higher education then is “the process by which institutions foster global learning” (Olson et al., 2006, p. v).

Global learning refers to three different but related types of learning – international, global, and intercultural (Olson et al., 2006, p. v). Following the distinction between internationalization and globalization, international learning is concerned with understanding nations and their relationships with one another, whereas global learning focuses on “systems and phenomena that transcend national borders” (Olson et al., 2006, p. v). Intercultural learning emphasizes the knowledge and skills necessary to understand cultural differences, regardless of national boundaries. (e.g., Deardoff, 2004).”



22

Global learning has come to encompass all three areas of learning: the relationships between nations, the ways in which national borders are transcended, and cultural differences. In short, global learning is “the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students acquire through a variety of experiences that enable them to understand world cultures and events; analyze global systems; appreciate cultural differences; and apply this knowledge and appreciation to their lives as citizens and workers” (Olson et al., 2006, p. v).

According to Hovland (2014a), a reconceptualization of global education is needed in which the earlier academic focus on institutional capabilities shifts to an emphasis on student learning outcomes, with greater attention to what global learners can actually do and how they apply the global competencies they acquire during their course of study. The goal of a global education, he argues, is not the creation of courses and structures, but the nurturing of a different kind of student. Who is that student? What can a global learner do?

The Global Learning VALUE Rubric of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), perhaps the strongest organizational proponent of global learning in the U.S. to date, includes a suite of knowledge, skills, and attitudes essential for global learning. “Through global learning, students should 1) become informed, open-minded, and responsible people who are attentive to diversity across a spectrum of differences, 2) seek to understand how their actions affect both local and global communities, and 3) address the world’s most pressing and enduring issues collaboratively and equitably” (AAC&U, 2014). The six key areas of global learning defined in the AAC&U rubric – global self-awareness, perspective taking, cultural diversity, personal and social responsibility, understanding global systems, and applying knowledge to contemporary global contexts – capture to a great degree the competencies developed by universities as part of their QEP efforts. Table 6 lists a sample of learning outcomes from globally focused QEPs. Common themes in this list are awareness, analysis of interdependencies, and intercultural communication. How then are institutions of higher education working to foster these competencies in their students? What are best practices in global education?

Traditionally, study abroad programs have provided the main source of cultural exchange fostering global awareness and intercultural competencies (Perry & Southwell, 2011; West, 2012). The value of study abroad programs has been documented by Chickering and Braskamp’s (2009) study of college students’ development, which found that in a comparison of students’ pre-and post-study abroad outcomes on the Global Perspective Inventory, students exhibited highest gains in their “knowledge and understanding of cultural differences” (Chickering & Braskamp, 2009, p. 29). In addition, a 2010 study conducted by the University System of Georgia found that students who participate in study abroad programs had higher graduation rates and higher grade point averages, although their overall knowledge of world geography and global connections was not significantly enhanced (Redden, 2010).

While study abroad has traditionally been the primary vehicle for a student’s international experience, there is growing consensus that study abroad is useful, although insufficient on its own, to provide the comprehensive cultural competence and learning environment necessary to navigate modern global economies (Ashwill, 2004; Deardorff & Hunter, 2006; Musil, 2006). It is argued that study abroad must be complemented by a multidisciplinary curriculum that provides the context for these experiences and teaches students how to apply the knowledge acquired through these experiences in their chosen field (Ashwill, 2004; Deardorff & Hunter, 2006; Musil, 2006; Singh & Papa, 2010). Sobania and Braskamp (2009) contend that the self-discovery essential to developing as a global learner can be facilitated by domestic transformative experiences based on service learning, study abroad, and other forms of intercultural exposure.


23


Institution QEP Global Learning Outcomes

University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

Learning without Borders: Internationalizing the Gator Nation (2014)

• Identify, describe and explain global and intercultural conditions and interdependencies

• Analyze and interpret global and intercultural issues

• Communicate effectively with members of other cultures

Appalachian State University, Boone, NC

Global Learning: A World of Opportunities for Appalachian Students (2013)

• Develop globally competent knowledge

• Cultivate intercultural competencies

• Foster globally competent citizenship

Winthrop University, Rock Hill, SC Global Learning Initiative (2011)

• Seniors will demonstrate awareness of various cultures and their impact on global society, and comprehension of various cultures and their impact on global society.

• Seniors will exhibit global civic responsibility by engaging effectively with others in diverse intercultural groups and settings.

• Seniors will exhibit attitudes that reflect cultural self-awareness and respect for and acceptance of cultural perspectives different from their own. Seniors will also exhibit behaviors that reflect cultural self-awareness and respect for and acceptance of cultural perspectives different from their own.

Florida International University, Miami, FL

Global Learning for Global Citizenship (2010)

• Global Awareness - Students will demonstrate knowledge of the interrelatedness of local, global, international, and intercultural issues, trends, and systems.

• Global Perspective - Students will demonstrate the ability to conduct a multi-perspective analysis of local, global, international, and intercultural problems.

• Global Engagement - Students will demonstrate willingness to engage in local, global, international, and intercultural problem solving.

University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, TX

GATE: Global Awareness through Education (2010)

• Knowledge of the world’s complexities and how political, economic, social, environmental, and technological forces shape their daily lives

• Technological, communication, social, and cultural skills necessary to be productive citizens in the global environment

• Understanding, sensitivity, and respect for cultural perspectives different from their own in order to be ethical and responsible global citizens

Duke University, Durham, NC

Global Duke: Enhancing Students’ Capacity for World Citizenship (2009)

• An awareness of significant contemporary issues and their global scope, including the history, differences, and perspectives of and within regions and cultures

• The ability to engage positively with, and learn from, people of different backgrounds and in different environments

• Self-awareness as both a national and global citizen

TABLE 6. GLOBAL LEARNING OUTCOMES AT OTHER INSTITUTIONS



24

Foreign language is also an integral component of students’ global competencies (AAC&U, 2007; ACTFL Board of Directors, 2014; Redman, 2014). Like study abroad programs, however, second language acquisition alone is not sufficient (Bok, 2006; Deardorff, 2011; Hunter, White, & Godbey, 2006). Instead, language study should be part of a “set of educational experiences,” including other opportunities such as globally themed residence halls, study abroad programs, on-campus lectures or events, specialized courses, and connecting students with peers abroad (Bok, 2006, p. 248). Introduction of such experiences infuses the campus culture with opportunities to further individuals’ global perspectives (Bok, 2006).

The recent trends in thinking about the impact of different kinds of international, global, and intercultural experiences manifest themselves in globally focused QEPs, which draw on a variety of strategies. A common theme among these QEPs is the importance of curricular modification, the expansion of co-curricular opportunities, and supporting faculty development. AAC&U’s Shared Futures initiative, General Education for a Global Century, focuses primarily on general education, since general education is the foundation for acquiring basic knowledge and skills to identify and frame issues effectively within a global context. On the other hand, any institutional commitment to global learning outcomes would lack substance without the direct inclusion of the departmental major (Musil, 2006). Finally, upper-level problem-solving capstone experiences provide a way to link general education with the major. Co-curricular efforts to develop students’ global perspectives can range from adding global components to existing group or leadership development programs to expanding the nature and quantity of programs designed to challenge students’ perspectives (Rudisille, Sans, Thiebe, Slater, Eaton, & Swanson, 2011). For example, institutions may consider offering programs like “In the Client’s Shoes” and “Oxfam Hunger Banquet,” a Model United Nations Club or conference, guest lectures, film or discussion series, hosting international or exchange students (Rudisille et al., 2011, p. 30); living-learning communities (Hendershot, 2010); mock cultural immersion experiences (Bresciani, 2008); and other exhibits or performances that are “pertinent to the culture, human relationships and social problems” (Chickering & Braskamp, 2009, p. 30). The commonality in these curricular and co-curricular programs reinforces the need to provide students with the opportunity for deep and reflective discussions, ideally with students who differ from themselves in some way. “Study away” opportunities are also argued to support students’ development of a global perspective, possessing the “same elements as an overseas program” (Sobania & Braskamp, 2009, p. 26). Engberg (2013) recommends institutions leverage both study abroad and domestic study away opportunities, advocating “an integrated approach to global learning,” because these efforts seem to support the achievement of different student learning outcomes (p. 478). Overall, the research literature indicates a need for a combined, integrated set of experiences to foster global competence, rather than reliance on any one program or method alone (Braskamp & Engberg, 2011).

Finally, a more recent idea for fostering global learning is through “collaborative internationalization” (Sutton, 2013). Here, the importance of international partnerships that benefit all parties is emphasized as a way of modeling the kinds of abilities and attitudes we desire for our students. “None of the goals of international education can be fully achieved if the institutions engaged in this work do not operate with the same global engagement and citizenship we ask of our students” (Sutton, 2013, p. 40). Indeed, the American Council on Education’s report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Global Engagement discusses the need for colleges and universities to go beyond existing models for global engagement, to align global and local interests, and to engage students and faculty globally through the


25


use of technology (ACE, 2011). “In the decades ahead, the most successful and influential institutions of all types will operate not alone, but in global networks in which faculty, students, research activity, teaching models, and ideas will travel freely” (ACE, 2011, p. 7). Collaborative internationalization can serve as a primary vehicle for such free travel.

B. Existing Global Resources, Activities, and Opportunities at USFTo incorporate global learning into the undergraduate experience successfully, the strategies employed must take into account available resources and the needs of the students. The following two sections describe existing global resources at USF and provide an overview of our students as a means of providing context for the Global Citizens Project.

USF’s global commitment is evident in its many international academic partnerships (over 200 active institutional agreements in over 55 countries) and extensive faculty engagement throughout the world (Figure 4). To map USF’s global footprint, USF World has designed an online, interactive portal, called the Global Discovery Database, in partnership with USF Information Technology, Research and Innovation, Travel, faculty and student workgroups, and the UCosmic© Consortium. From a single web-interface, the USF community (and beyond) is able to access information about international partnerships, the international activities of faculty, language and geographic expertise among faculty and staff, and in future iterations make connections with alumni living and working abroad.

In addition, the newly created online USF Global Discovery Hub is designed to facilitate international activities for USF faculty, staff, and students. The “Hub” offers a comprehensive array of resources for international research, scholarships, awards/honors, and travel. Students may access a dedicated website for real-time information about international internships and job opportunities across the globe. Students on H1-B visas at USF may search for employment opportunities within the U.S. Global “spotlights” highlight USF faculty and students whose international engagement is having a global impact—in the research arena, teaching, the creative arts, and in service. The Global Discovery Hub is intended to support and catalyze global engagement.



26

FIGURE 4. USF FACULTY’S GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY

USF Faculty Global Engagement

8.6%

13.5%

16.4%

Research and Creative Endeavors

Teaching and Mentoring

Professional Service and Consulting

Earned Advanced Degree/s

Awards and Honors

24.8%

36.8%

n = 1015 faculty; faculty may appear in more than one category

The various colleges of USF engage in global activities and initiatives throughout the world. For example, the College of Behavioral and Community Sciences (CBCS) offers two study-abroad programs in Florence, Italy, to provide students with the opportunity to study comparative behavioral health. A new study abroad program offered through the department of Mental Health Law and Policy was developed for students to study homelessness and behavioral health in Ireland. The School of Social Work offered its first study abroad program in India. The program is designed to provide students with theory, practice skills, and techniques for social work with indigenous populations. CBCS faculty conduct work with international partners in Australia, Canada, China, Chile, the Czech Republic, Ghana, Haiti, India, Israel, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Singapore, South Korea, and Turkey.

The students, faculty, and staff of the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) are also engaged in many global activities. For example, many departments have unique study abroad opportunities for our students. In 2014, the School of Mass Communications began offering a publication design course at the Palazzi Florence Association for International Education in Italy. The Global Initiative on Civil Society and Conflict launched an internship program in which USF students are working with Washington NGOs and think tanks. The Chinese program at USF prepares students to intern at companies in China, allowing them to be fully immersed in the language and culture while honing key career skills. In fall 2014, the Institute for the Study of Latin America and the Caribbean hosted a conference dedicated to raising awareness about human trafficking, and in 2015, CAS will host a conference about World War I.


27


Through various study abroad programs, USF’s College of Engineering (CoENG) undergraduates attend the University of Exeter in Cornwall, UK, the Charles Darwin University in Darwin, Australia, and the Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, in Valencia, Spain, among others. CoENG has established articulation agreements with Universidad del Norte in Colombia and with the University of the Virgin Islands, which allow their students to transfer to USF’s College of Engineering and complete their B.S. degrees in one to two years. For more than 10 years, NSF-funded Summer Research Experience for Undergraduate programs in CoENG have attracted engineering students from Colombia, Burkina Faso, China, Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana, Jamaica, and Puerto Rico to work collaboratively with our USF engineering students on research projects covering a wide variety of topics in all six departments of the College. USF Engineering students conducted research on clean water at Exeter University during summer 2014. Engineering student members of the “Engineers Without Borders” student society participated in a rain water catching system project in the Dominican Republic to help provide clean water for people living in the town of Miches.

In the summer of 2014, 133 students in the Muma College of Business participated in a variety of study abroad programs around the world focusing on global information systems (Italy and India), global enterprise and international relations (United Kingdom), international business (Spain and France), as well as international internship programs with Ernst & Young, Marriott, and Liberal Art Institute (Czech Republic). New MOU initiatives include a new dual degree program with Universidad del Norte located in Barranquilla, Columbia, and a new 3+1 agreement with MITSOM University in Pune, India, with other agreements in China, Malaysia, and India in the planning phase. Muma COB offers a degree in International Business, which requires proficiency in a foreign language defined by no less than five semesters of study in the same language; a study abroad experience to a country where this language is spoken; and hours of area studies in the same region where the language is spoken; completion of a business concentration = 12 credits in management, marketing, finance, information systems. Finally, since 2010, Muma COB has delivered the last two years of an undergraduate business program on site at USIL University in Lima, Peru.

The College of Nursing (CON) has well-established global partnerships with the University of Panama in Panama City, Panama, and Chitre, Panama, the University of The Virgin Islands in St. Croix, and Sterling University in Edinburgh, Scotland. Undergraduate students enrolled in CON’s Community/Population Health course visit these countries for a two-week immersion experience working in local clinics and hospital settings to deliver culturally appropriate health care and education to meet the needs of the population. CON faculty are currently engaged in co-authoring publications with international colleagues from the above settings, as well as engaging in a student and faculty exchange with Sterling University and University of Panama, Chitre, to increase knowledge of global health care systems, and evidence-based nursing education and practice. Students participating in the Panama exchange are required to complete requirements related to medical Spanish.

The College of Education (CoEDU) offers study abroad programs and internships in the United Kingdom (Cambridge Schools Experience), Belize (Higher Education in a Developing Country), and Germany (Career and Workforce Education). CoEDU projects include the ongoing Ghana Service Learning Program in which students engage in service at a Ghanaian orphanage, and the Global Schools Project, which brought international teachers to study at USF for six weeks at a time. Through an MOU with Minzu University in China, Masters students in Chinese language education can come to USF for one year and graduate with a dual Masters from Minzu University and an M.Ed., concentration in Foreign Language Education from USF College of Education.



28



28

Study abroad programs in the College of Public Health (CoPH) offer public health coursework for USF students in South Africa, Panama, and Malaysia. CoPH students have also participated in a Global Disaster Management & Humanitarian Relief course during the summer semester of 2013 in Belize. In the International Ambassador Program, USF Health students serve as ambassadors for visiting delegates from around the world. The students are able to interact and network with international guests/speakers while they help to make professional guests feel welcome and confident about their USF visit.

The College of The Arts (CoTA) offers USF’s first and longest-running study abroad program, the School of Art & Art History’s Summer Art Program in Paris, which provides students with a month-long immersion experience. Architecture faculty and students participated in an international effort to restore a Turkish “ghost town” abandoned in 1974 as a result of military conflict. The project aims to re-envision the coastal town of Famagusta into a strategically designed “green” city. The School of Music Jazz Ensemble has performed at prestigious jazz festivals in Italy, France, and Great Britain alongside leading contemporary artists from around the world. A series of videos created by dance faculty to convey the dangers of bullying and dating violence has been adopted as educational tools by the World Health Organization, Pan American Health Organization, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as well as other organizations in Australia, Northern Ireland, Finland, Scotland, and South America. Performed at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival in Scotland, What the Heart Remembers: The Women and Children of Darfur, a performance written and choreographed by School of Theatre & Dance faculty, brought to light the horrors of genocide and was nominated for the Amnesty International Freedom of Expression Award. SubRosa: The Language of Resistance, organized by the USF Institute for Research in Art, examined how the language of art across continents and cultures responds to social, political and environmental repression. Artists from China, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Palestine, South Africa, and Cuba were represented.

For the 2014-2015 academic year, the Honors College is sponsoring seven international experience courses that incorporate trips abroad, and three international service break programs. Destinations for these study abroad opportunities include Germany, Tanzania, Costa Rica, London/Paris, Argentina, Greece, Peru, Vietnam, Panama, and China/Taiwan. These programs are supported by multiple Honors College scholarships specifically designated for study abroad. The Honors College also welcomes enrollments by international students as an important part of the Honors educational experience. As of 2014-2015, 3% of Honors College enrollment is composed of international students. The Honors College curriculum includes a course entitled Geographic Perspectives, each section of which addresses important topics in geographic areas outside Europe and North America. Many of these sections are taught by international faculty invited to bring their global knowledge and perspective into the classroom. The Honors Living Learning Community also supports globalization through internationally themed programming including guest lecturers, student events, and residence with international students. Honors students must complete a cultural experience requirement as part of the Honors College curriculum, which can be fulfilled with either two semesters of foreign language or participation in an international travel program.

Student Affairs supports the global mission of the university within their departments. The Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement sponsors International Bulls Service Breaks, which give students a chance to spend a week in a new country meeting new people, supporting important social needs, and making a difference during their week abroad. The Office of Multicultural Affairs offers a Cultural Competency Certificate and hosts the iBuddy


29


29

program, which partners international and domestic students studying at USF for the purpose of cultural exchange and friendship building. Residential Life and Education has incorporated global citizenship as one of the five primary learning outcomes for the campus housing curriculum. USF also provides a Common Reading Experience, the slogan of which is One Book – Global Connections.

The USF Libraries support the global instructional and research activities of USF students and faculty through its extensive physical and electronic collections. The USF Tampa Library Special Collections unit houses the physical collection of the USF Libraries Holocaust and Genocide Studies Center, which has a specific focus on the Holocaust, Armenia, and the Great Lakes Region of Africa. Also housed in Special Collections is a Science Fiction & Fantasy collection that uniquely focuses on Latin American science fiction. The USF Libraries is also currently investigating the use of language learning databases to enhance our foreign language programs.

Finally, USF entered into a partnership in 2010 with INTO, a for-profit organization that works with universities in North America, United Kingdom, and China to provide a variety of academic pathway and English language courses for international students. The pathways are offered at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, and are either one or two semesters in length. During the pathway, in which the students are non-degree-seeking at USF, they take English Language courses and coursework required for their intended major. After successful completion of the pathway, the students automatically progress to degree-seeking status at USF.

C. Our StudentsUSF serves more than 30,000 undergraduates, in addition to almost 10,000 graduate students. Table 7 presents a statistical profile of our undergraduate student population. In general, more female undergraduates (55%) than male undergraduates (45%) attend USF. Nearly half of USF undergraduates (46%) self-identify with a racial/ethnic group other than White. Of particular note is the significant number of transfer versus first-time-in-college students who attend USF: 53% of the fall 2014 incoming class are transfer students. Also, in-state students overwhelmingly outnumber out-of-state students. Finally, 42% of all undergraduates receive aid from Pell Grant.

Importantly, international students compose 12% of USF’s total student population (fall 2014, n=5,004) and just over 8.5% of USF’s undergraduate population (fall 2014, n=2,616). International students represent over 150 countries, with the majority originating from China (13%) and India (13%), followed by Colombia (4%), Venezuela (3.5%), Canada (3%), and Jamaica (2.9%) (InfoCenter 2014).



30

N %

Undergraduate Enrollment, Fall 2014 30,317 75%

Male 13,750 45%

Female 16,567 55%

Non-Resident Aliens 1,277 4%

Hispanic 6,134 20%

Black 3,325 11%

American Indian 65 0%

Asian 1,889 6%

White 16,005 53%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 84 0%

Two or More Races 1,114 4%

Race Not Reported 424 1%

In-State 28,015 92%

Out-of-State 2,302 8%

Undergraduate Pell Grant recipients 12,498 42%

Undergraduate Pell Eligible students 29,422 --

Undergraduate Transfers (New Student Counts) 3,478 53%

Total New Undergraduates 6,621 --

Source: Office of Decision Support, InfoCenter

TABLE 7. UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT POPULATION STATISTICS (FALL 2014, DEGREE-SEEKING)

Students at USF are high academic achievers. New freshmen for the fall 2014 semester had an average high school GPA of 4.0, an average SAT score of 1196, and average ACT score of 27 (Table 8). Eight students in the 2014 freshman class are National Merit Scholars, seven are National Achievement Scholars, and six are National Hispanic Scholars. USF is a top producer of Fulbright U.S. Student Scholarship recipients, and one of only 15 universities in the nation selected as a Tillman Partnership University of the Pat Tillman Foundation. In 2013-2014, there were 76 national scholarship and fellowship award winners among USF students (USF System, 2013-2014).

The number of undergraduates participating in activities regarded as institutional priorities and high impact educational practices, such as study abroad, undergraduate research, and community service, has been increasing. However, participation still remains below institutional goals. From the 2012-2013 academic year to the 2013-2014 academic year, the number of USF undergraduates studying abroad increased by 17%. Despite this growth, the total percentage of undergraduates who participated in study abroad is just over 3% (USF World, 2014). USF’s goal is to increase the percentage of unduplicated undergraduate students engaged in an overseas academic experience to 4% by 2017-2018.


31


USF’s undergraduate students also engage in academic research, evidenced by a steady increase in attendance by 1st and 2nd year undergraduate students at the Getting Started in Undergraduate Research Workshop, which grew from 25% in 2011-12 to 54% in 2013-2014. Through the annual Undergraduate Research and Arts Colloquium, students are given the opportunity to showcase their work to peers, faculty, and staff, and these projects often lead to both academic and professional collaborations. However, of the 2,752 students (9% of total undergraduate population) who participated in undergraduate research in the fall of 2013, only 294 presented in the 2014 Undergraduate Research and Arts Colloquium. Results from the 2013 Graduating Senior Survey also indicate that only 57.3% of seniors reported being satisfied with the opportunities for research.

Our students actively participate in community service opportunities and/or service-learning courses. USF’s Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement reports that USF students volunteered a total of 186,716.5 hours in 2013-2014, while USF’s Office for Community Engagement and Partnerships reports that 188 service-learning course sections were delivered in 2013-2014 with a total enrollment of 4,013 students.

Finally, our students have the opportunity to engage in foreign language and culture study through the Department of World Languages. World Languages provides courses at all levels in support of the internationalization of the curriculum and global and multicultural education. The department maintains programs and opportunities for education and research abroad in order to foster international education, scholarship, and exchange, in addition to offering service and outreach programs and events supporting and engaging the Tampa Bay community. While our students take advantage of these programs, undergraduate enrollment in foreign language, literature, and culture courses has been decreasing slowly over the past three years (Table 9). It should be noted that requirements for the Bachelor of Arts is two semesters of a beginning college-level foreign language or one semester of a higher-level course, while there is no foreign language requirement for the Bachelor of Science.

New FTIC Profile (Fall 2014) 2,932

Average SAT (2-part) 1196

Average HS GPA 4.0

Average ACT 27

Top 10% 30

Top 20% 50

Bright Futures Scholarship Recipients (USF System) 62%

Hispanic Scholars 6

National Merit 8

National Achievement Scholars 7

National Scholarship and Fellowship Awardees (2013-14 AY) 76

Domestic Students from Florida* 95%

Domestic Students from Tampa Bay Area* 57%

*Includes degree-seeking and non-degree, total enrollment Source: Office of Decision Support, InfoCenter

TABLE 8. NEW FTIC PROFILE (FALL 2014)



32

The makeup of the USF student body presents opportunities as well as challenges for an institution that envisions itself as a global research university. Challenges include the limited opportunity to engage the significant number of transfer students who attend USF. Transfer students often enter USF with most, if not all, of their general education requirements fulfilled and graduate at a faster pace than first-time-in-college students. The Global Citizens Project must take this into account and design meaningful global experiences that will attract transfer students and enable them to graduate in a timely manner.

Another challenge relates to the fact that an overwhelmingly large proportion of our domestic students come from Florida (95%), especially the surrounding Tampa Bay area (57%). These students can have limited experience outside of the U.S. and even the state. Developing global competencies requires first recognizing the importance of a global perspective. Study abroad can be eye opening in this regard, yet finances, family obligations, and work often prevent USF students from traveling and/or participating in study abroad. Also, not all degree programs provide students the flexibility in their required curriculum to enroll in study abroad and/or foreign language courses. The Global Citizens Project should cultivate student curiosity and provide multiple ways for students to explore the world.

On the other hand, a significant opportunity for global engagement lies in the increasing numbers of international students who bring their own perspectives and understandings of the world to USF while seeking new experiences. Meaningful interaction between our international students and our domestic students can enhance

New FTIC Profile (Fall 2014) 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 TOTAL

Arabic 357 313 326 996

Chinese 446 442 526 1414

Classics (incl. Latin) 1280 1288 1451 4019

French 2085 1800 1431 5316

General Foreign Lang. 100 124 115 339

German 682 824 742 2248

Greek 114 71 40 225

Hebrew 100 94 0 194

Italian 587 646 559 1792

Japanese 595 544 486 1625

Linguistics 396 390 349 1135

Portuguese 108 96 142 346

Russian 317 331 378 1026

Spanish 5900 5887 5137 16,924

Total 13,067 12,850 11,682 37,599

*Includes degree-seeking and non-degree, total enrollment Source: Office of Decision Support, InfoCenter

TABLE 9. UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT IN WORLD LANGUAGE EDUCATION (2011-2014)


33


global perspectives on both fronts. Also, the number of student organizations with a global or international theme (44 multicultural, 12 international, and 11 political) suggests some desire for exploration, although it is not easily ascertained how actively students participate. But since 75% of first-time-in-college students at USF live on campus, these student organizations offer another opportunity for them to engage in global activities from the convenience of their home campus. Student organizations and on-campus housing may provide opportunities for foreign language study, as well.

Certainly the increasing numbers of undergraduates participating in experiential learning activities, such as study abroad, undergraduate research, and community service, suggest an expanding interest in exploration and active involvement generally on the part of students. The Global Citizens Project builds on this momentum by involving Education Abroad, the Office for Undergraduate Research, Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement, the Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships, and other partners within Student Affairs.

D. The Global Citizens ProjectThe Global Citizens Project capitalizes on the many existing global resources and opportunities at USF while taking into account the varied needs and interests of our students. Institutional priorities and best practices adapted to our campus culture are also incorporated. All of this is held together by a conceptual framework and accompanying learning outcomes supported by theories on learning and development and studies of global citizenship.

I. GCP Theoretical Foundations

Generations of scholars have dealt with the issue of the distinction between self and other in human interaction. The great philosopher Emmanuel Kant elevated the discussion regarding the relationship between the subject and object deeming phenomena as the knowable ding am sich (thing in itself) and noumenon, the limits placed on knowledge by how we perceive “other.” As early as the 1930s, developmental psychologists like Piaget began to focus on the development of this distinction between self and other as a concept he called “decentration,” a process through which developing humans move from egocentrism to an awareness of and engagement with the environment (Piaget, 1950). Uri Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecological Theory of Development provided a schematic of this process with the “self” at the center and “other” represented in ever-widening concentric circles from a microsystem, those closest like parents and family, to a macrosystem of outer circles, such as culture, history, and economic systems.

Even as cognitive developmental theories were emerging, so too were theories of problem solving. One of these theories, Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956), began as an effort to provide guidance for teachers to question students at increasingly sophisticated levels but became increasingly modified for use as guidance in curricular development and the development of test items. Still others, such as Lawrence Kohlberg (1976) and Nancy Eisenberg (2000), extended this form of cognitive decentration to moral development, which began with simple self-serving morality to more complex moral judgment involving societal and culturally independent



34

moral reasoning. Other theorists took alternative viewpoints while maintaining the focus on selflessness. For example, Carol Gilligan (1982) put forth an alternative to the dominant male voice, which places concepts like “justice” within the framework of her own stages in the development of the ethic of care. Taking this idea another step, Nel Noddings (1999) asserted that caring is the foundation of ethical decision-making. All these theories encompass not only the cognitive aspects of development but also the conative and affective, including a sense of social responsibility and the motivation to live up to personal values. Inevitably, other researchers began to apply developmental theories to adolescents and post-adolescents as they engaged in educational experiences. William Perry (1968), for example, developed a model in which younger more naïve students entered these experiences with a binary or dualistic mind set, that is, the anticipation of learning a right way or correct theory from the wrong or incorrect progressing through multiple perspective taking, relativistic thinking, and finally to an ultimate stage of empathetic reasoning that yielded the ability to “see the world as others see it.”

Recent theories aimed at more specific aspects of cognitive and affective development, including the global citizen, mirror these developmental theories. Of significance here is a model of global citizenship put forth by Hans Schattle in his 2008 book, The practices of global citizenship. The primary concepts of Schattle’s model involve an increasingly sophisticated developmental pattern from awareness to responsibility to participation (Figure 5). “These three concepts can be viewed as a trajectory in which progressions of global citizenship emerge in the lives of individuals, with awareness of one’s role in the world instilling a sense of responsibility that in turn inspires participation in politics or civil society” (Schattle, 2008, p. 26).

FIGURE 5. THREE PRIMARY CONCEPTS OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP (SCHATTLE, 2008)

Global Citizenship

Awareness• Self-awareness• Outward awareness

• Principled decision making• Solidarity across humanity

• Voice and activity• Calls for accountability and reform

Participation

Responsibility


35


Schattle (2008) first identifies awareness as an important concept of global citizenship, distinguishing between an inward, or self-, awareness and an outward awareness. Self-awareness, as the term implies, speaks to an individual’s sense of self and “strong and well-defined roots” (Schattle, 2008, p. 28). Outward awareness includes the ability to understand issues from multiple perspectives (sometimes isolated as perspective taking in other models of global learning) and understanding differences as well as commonalities in human experiences. Schattle (2008, p. 29) highlights self-awareness as an “initial step of global citizenship and the lens through which further experiences and insights are perceived.” Outward awareness “provides the motivation… to embark on sustained involvement in society or politics and to begin to take responsibility for a global common good” (Schattle, 2009, p.11; emphasis added).

Responsibility as global citizenship entails “principled decision making and a sense of solidarity across humanity,” while participation as global citizenship is defined on a basic level as “contributing to the social or political life of a community [voice and activity]” (Schattle, 2008, p. 34-40). Responsibility emphasizes individual choices that take into account the impact of one’s actions on others, while participation implies activism and engagement (political or not) involving interaction with others. In its most intense form, participation can involve actively seeking reforms within governing institutions (Schattle, 2008, p. 42).

Schattle (2008) also identifies a set of secondary concepts of global citizenship, which include cross-cultural empathy. Cross-cultural empathy involves “how an individual interacts with others and fits in wherever one should happened to be planted” and thus relates to intercultural competence. Yet, cross-cultural empathy also “depends heavily on a willingness to build personal relationships with those from other backgrounds” (Schattle, 2008, p. 49; emphasis added).

II. GCP Conceptual Framework and Student Learning Outcomes

By tying Schattle’s (2008) primary concepts of global citizenship to key aspects of cognitive and moral developmentalists, USF has built a model whose holistic developmental outcome is global citizenship (Figure 6). At the heart of our conceptualization lie three global competencies based on Schattle’s (2008) concepts: global awareness, global responsibility, and global participation. These three competencies link affective (feeling), conative (motivation to act), and cognitive (thinking) domains of global citizenship. Within the affective/conative domain, we define three student learning outcomes for the Global Citizens Project:

• Self-Awareness: Students will demonstrate self-awareness with regard to values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.

• Willingness: Students will demonstrate a willingness to make individual choices that reflect concern

for others.

• Practice: Students will demonstrate the ability to put into action professed values, beliefs, and attitudes

that express concern for others.



36


36

Student Learning Outcomes Competencies Student Learning Outcomes

Self-AwarenessGlobal Awareness

“Awareness of one’s role in the world”

KnowledgeSelf-awareness with regard to values, beliefs, attitudes, and

behaviors

Knowledge of global and cultural systems and issues

Willingness Global Responsibility“Responsible behavior linked

with recognition of global interdependencies”

Analysis

Willingness to make individual choices that reflect concern for

others

Ability to analyze global and cultural interrelationships and

interdependencies across place and time

PracticeGlobal Participation

“Participation in politics or civil society,” locally or globally

SynthesisAbility to put into action

professed values, beliefs, and attitudes that express concern

for others

Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex issues and/or

unfamiliar situations

Global CitizenshipWillingness and ability to engage constructively with diverse people, places, events,

challenges, and opportunities

FIGURE 6. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT (QUOTES ARE FROM SCHATTLE, 2008.)

Affe

ctiv

e / C

onat

ive

Cognitive

We also define a set of three cognitive learning outcomes for the Global Citizens Project:

• Knowledge: Students will demonstrate knowledge of global and cultural systems and issues.

• Analysis: Students will demonstrate the ability to analyze global and cultural interrelationships and interdependencies across place and time.

• Synthesis: Students will demonstrate the ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex issues and/or unfamiliar situations.

While there is an intentional scaffolding of learning outcomes within each domain, it is recognized that the learning process is not linear and indeed all six learning outcomes interrelate and build upon each other. The cognitive learning outcomes are based on three levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy and include increasing levels of sophisticated reasoning and problem solving. Similarly, there is a transition from the affective learning outcome, “self-awareness,” through the conative learning outcome, “willingness,” to the behavioral learning outcome, “practice.” Ultimately, we propose that the outcome is global citizenship, which we generally define as the willingness and ability to engage constructively with diverse people, places, events, challenges, and opportunities.


3737


There are features of the model that, while implied in its linear structure, are not intended to be viewed as such. The following caveats should be considered:

• By its very nature, the conceptual model has not been empirically tested. That will be a key aspect of the assessment of the model.

• The model appears to assume that affect is tied to knowledge, while willingness is tied to analysis, and practice to synthesis. While there is some evidence that one can only learn to deal with unfamiliar or unexpected complications in problem solving by engaging in problems, in this case engaging in globally challenging situations, one aspect of testing the model will be to construct a path analysis testing these connections.

• The model appears to assume that learning to become a global citizen is a linear, continuous process from one stage to the next. Many developmental models of cognition and affect, e.g., Piaget (1950) and Vygotsky (1978), do not make such assumptions and in fact assume that development is non-linear and discontinuous with periods of rapid growth punctuated by plateaus. This is another aspect of the model to be tested as part of the Global Citizens Project.

In order to operationalize our conceptual model, a list of behavioral indicators for each student learning outcome has been defined based on the work of USF faculty, staff, and students. The increasing emphasis on global engagement at USF has led some units on campus to craft global learning outcomes related to their specific programs outside the context of the QEP. For example, prior to the initiation of the QEP, Residential Life and Education developed a residential curriculum that includes global citizenship as an area of emphasis. The global learning outcomes associated with this curriculum were used as a basis to define the affective/conative behavioral indicators. Similarly, the global emphases of the FKL Core Curriculum formed the basis for the development of the cognitive learning outcomes and behavioral indicators. In Figure 7, the behavioral indicators and learning outcomes are organized into a flowchart to illustrate how the Global Citizens Project aligns with USF’s Strategic Plan and institutional mission.



38

FIGURE 7. GCP STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES FLOWCHART

Lear

ning

Out

com

esB

ehav

iora

l Ind

icat

ors

University MissionDeliver competitive undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs, to generate knowledge, foster intellectual development, and

ensure student success in a global environment



University Strategic Goal #1Prepare well-educated and highly skilled global citizens through our continuing commitment to student success


Global Citizen DefinitionA global citizen is willing and able to engage contructively with diverse people, places, events, challenges, and opportunities.


Global Citizens Project GoalDevelop students’ affective, conative, and cognitive abilities essential to being a global citizen


Affective/Conative Domain Cognitive Domain

Self-Awareness Willingness Practice Knowledge Analysis Synthesis

Students will demonstrate self-awareness with regard to values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.

Students will demonstrate willingness to make individual choices that reflect concern for others.

Students will demonstrate the ability to put into action professed values, beliefs, and attitudes that express concern for others.

Students will demonstrate knowledge of global and cultural systems and issues.

Students will demonstrate the ability to analyze global and cultural interrelationships and interdependencies across place and time.

Students will demonstrate the ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex issues and/or unfamiliar situations.

Students will be able to:

• define personal values and beliefs.

• explore how one’s worldview is shaped by personal values, identity, cultural rules, and biases.

• evaluate congruency between values and actions.

• recognize differences in people’s values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors.

• recognize common human experiences.

Students will:

• participate in community service that strengthens communities and improve lives.

• participate in research that strengthens communities and improves lives.

• participate in study abroad programs that strengthen communities and improve lives.


• evaluate the impact of individual choices on local and global communities.

• actively communicate to prevent and resolve conflict.

• use appropriate language and communication methods that consider others’ points of view and respect differences.

• develop relationships with others from different cultural backgrounds.


• identify and describe major global issues.

• describe multiple aspects of global/cultural systems.

• recognize that cultural systems experience historical and geopolitical processes differently.

• recognize that global issues and systems are experienced differently at local scales.


• analyze cultures as complex systems shaped by relations of power and interdependence.

• analyze global issues and challenges, their histories, and impacts.

• compare and contrast the impact of historical and geopolitical processes on cultural systems.

• compare and contrast how global issues and systems are experienced at different scales.


• synthesize different types and sources of information.

• incorporate multiple perspectives into decision making.

• assess local and/or global impacts of planned actions.

• weigh options/planned actions and/or formulate possible solutions.

• communicate ideas and information to diverse audiences.


39












Affective/Conative Domain Cognitive Domain

Self-Awareness Willingness Practice Knowledge Analysis Synthesis

Students will demonstrate self-awareness with regard to values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.

Students will demonstrate willingness to make individual choices that reflect concern for others.

Students will demonstrate the ability to put into action professed values, beliefs, and attitudes that express concern for others.

Students will demonstrate knowledge of global and cultural systems and issues.

Students will demonstrate the ability to analyze global and cultural interrelationships and interdependencies across place and time.

Students will demonstrate the ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex issues and/or unfamiliar situations.


• define personal values and beliefs.

• explore how one’s worldview is shaped by personal values, identity, cultural rules, and biases.

• evaluate congruency between values and actions.

• recognize differences in people’s values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors.

• recognize common human experiences.

Students will:

• participate in community service that strengthens communities and improve lives.

• participate in research that strengthens communities and improves lives.

• participate in study abroad programs that strengthen communities and improve lives.


• evaluate the impact of individual choices on local and global communities.

• actively communicate to prevent and resolve conflict.

• use appropriate language and communication methods that consider others’ points of view and respect differences.

• develop relationships with others from different cultural backgrounds.



• describe multiple aspects of global/cultural systems.









• synthesize different types and sources of information.

• incorporate multiple perspectives into decision making.




Learning Outcom

esB

ehavioral Indicators



4040

III. GCP Program Goals and Objectives

To cultivate and enhance students’ global competencies, as defined above, we have developed three program goals, with accompanying objectives, designed to provide scaffolded educational enrichment over the course of a student’s undergraduate experience at USF. The goals and objectives take into account both FTIC and transfer students and allow for the participation of faculty and professional staff in GCP activities. The goals of the Global Citizens Project also encourage students to make connections among general education, degree programs, and co-curricular experiences.

The process by which the GCP program goals and objectives were developed is explained in detail in Section IV Broad-based Involvement, but here it is important to highlight a few key points that guided GCP development. Most important was the understanding that the needs of our students should remain at the forefront and that their learning should be the focus of the Global Citizens Project. As a result, it was agreed that no new requirements for students would be added and that our first-time-in-college and transfer students should benefit equally from the plan. Equally important was the recognition that the development of students as global citizens requires an integrated, across-the-curriculum approach infused throughout the undergraduate experience. Global citizenship is not something that can be learned in one or two classes. Therefore, multiple opportunities for student engagement with the learning outcomes are needed. In addition, there was the sense that there was no need to create something completely new at USF. Rather, we should take advantage of the significant number of resources already available, in particular in the areas of study abroad, undergraduate research, and community service, which are institutional priorities. This included the understanding that one need not travel abroad to have a “global experience.” Tampa Bay offers a multitude of opportunities to engage with global issues and diverse groups in a local setting. Finally, we should use existing structures, processes, and procedures at USF as much as possible as a means of integrating the Global Citizens Project fully into the culture of the university and ensuring project sustainability. The programmatic goals of the Global Citizens Project reflect these guidelines.

The GCP program goals and objectives are as follows:

Goal 1. Global FKL: Provide students with an introduction to global competencies through the FKL Core Curriculum.

• Objective 1.1: Infuse the learning outcomes of the Global Citizens Project into key areas of general education.

• Objective 1.2: Infuse the learning outcomes of the Global Citizens Project into the Capstone Learning Experience.

Goal 2. Global Pathways: Provide students with opportunities to practice and apply global competencies through degree programs.

• Objective 2.1: Infuse the learning outcomes of the Global Citizens Project into required courses of degree programs.

• Objective 2.2: Identify and/or develop global co-curricular experiences within degree programs.


4141


Goal 3. Global Citizen Awards: Provide students with opportunities to reinforce global competencies through a Global Citizen Awards program.

• Objective 3.1: Infuse the learning outcomes of the Global Citizens Project into a broad array of non-general education courses.

• Objective 3.2: Identify and/or develop a variety of global co-curricular experiences across the university.

Figure 8 provides a schematic overview of the GCP program goals and objectives. Program objectives will be aligned with the GCP student learning outcomes through certification processes, as described in the following sections.

Program Goals

Global FKL

Global Pathways

Global Citizen Awards

Program Objectives

General Education

Capstone Learning Experience

Required Coursework in Degree Programs

Co-Curricular Experiences in Degree Programs

Non-General Education Courses

Co-Curricular Experiences Across the University

Stu

dent

Lea

rnin

g O

utco

mes

C

ertifi

catio

n Pr

oces

ses

Glo

bal C

itize

ns P

roje

ct

FIGURE 8. SCHEMATIC OF GCP PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The goals of the Global Citizens Project encourage students to

make connections among general education, degree programs,

and co-curricular experiences.



4242

GCP Program Goal 1: Global FKL

GCP Program Goal 1, Global FKL, is to provide students with an introduction to global competencies through the FKL Core Curriculum. This will be accomplished by infusing the learning outcomes of the Global Citizens Project into key areas of general education (Objective 1.1). Because we have a significant amount of transfer students, we will also infuse the GCP learning outcomes into the Capstone Learning Experience (Objective 1.2), which is an existing requirement for all students.

As explained in Section I Institutional Process, the FKL Core Curriculum consists of lower-level general education courses and an upper-level capstone learning experience. Students are required to complete 36 credit hours of

general education in seven core areas (See Section I for list of core areas). The Capstone Learning Experience consists of capstone courses and writing-intensive courses. Students are required to complete three credits of capstone coursework and three credits of writing intensive coursework, typically in their junior and senior years.

Underlying the FKL Core Curriculum (general education and capstone learning experience) is a set of 14 dimensions, including Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context (see Section I for the complete list of FKL dimensions). When an academic department proposes a course for inclusion in general education, the proposing department selects one core area and four dimensions for which the course will be reviewed and certified by the General Education Council as meeting the goals of the FKL Core Curriculum. Two dimensions, Critical Thinking and Inquiry-based Learning, are required of all FKL courses. The two remaining dimensions are at the discretion of the proposing department.

The GCP cognitive learning outcomes grew out of the FKL dimensions of Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context. Because of this, the GCP learning outcomes flowchart can be rearranged for the purposes of the FKL Core Curriculum without altering the content of the GCP learning outcomes (Figure 9).


4343


FIGURE 9. GCP STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR THE FKL CORE CURRICULUM

FKL Core Curriculum

Human and Cultural Diversity Global Context

Students will demonstrate an understanding of the diversity of human experiences.

Students will demonstrate an understanding of the complexity and dynamic nature of local and global processes.

Knowledge Analysis Synthesis Knowledge Analysis Synthesis

Students will demonstrate knowledge of diverse cultures and associated ideologies, languages, histories, geographies, technologies, and artistic/cultural expressions.

Students will demonstrate the ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of cultural systems and issues across place and time.

Students will demonstrate the ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex cultural issues or unfamiliar cultural situations.

Students will demonstrate knowledge of global systems and issues and associated dimensions (e.g. historical, political, economic, social, cultural, environmental, technological).

Students will demonstrate the ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of global systems and issues across place and time.

Students will demonstrate the ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex global issues.


• describe multiple dimensions of cultures (e.g. environmental, ideological, linguistic, communicative, historical, geographic, technological, and/or artistic).



• explain the connections among dimensions of cultures.


• compare and contrast how cultural systems structure basic social categories (e.g. sex, gender, sexuality, age, class, disability, nationality, race, ethnicity, immigration status).



• synthesize different types and sources of information to assess cultural issues or situations.

• incorporate multiple perspectives into decision making when addressing cultural issue or situations.


• differentiate patterns in human behavior, beliefs, norms, perceptions, and aspirations.



• describe multiple dimensions of global systems (e.g. historical, political, economic, ethical, social, cultural, environmental, and/or technologtical).



• explain the connections among dimensions of global systems.


• analyze the ethical, social, and environmental challenges of global systems.



• synthesize different types and sources of information to assess global issues.

• incorporate multiple perspectives (e.g. disciplinary, cultural, ethical) into decision making when addressing global issues.



Dim

ensi

ons D

imensions

GC

P L

earn

ing

Out

com

esG

CP

Learning Outcom

esG

CP

Beh

avio

ral I

ndic

ator

s GC

P B

ehavioral Indicators



44

To infuse the GCP learning outcomes into key areas of general education (Objective 1.1), all general education courses in the core areas of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Humanities, and Fine Arts will be required to address either the Human and Cultural Diversity dimension or the Global Context dimension (either by substituting an existing dimension or adding a fifth). All courses in the core area of Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context will be required to address both dimensions. Appendix C lists all of USF’s general education courses organized into columns by core area. The courses are color-coded according to those that already incorporate the dimension of Human and Cultural Diversity (gold), Global Context (light green), or both (dark green). It is instructive to see that currently 41 courses incorporate Human and Cultural Diversity, 15 incorporate Global Context, and eight incorporate both dimensions in some fashion. Global FKL Objective 1.1 aims to have all courses in the identified core areas address one or both of the both of the dimensions within the next six years. In this manner, students taking general education courses in these core areas at USF will be exposed to global competencies regardless of their major. Courses in the remaining core areas (Communication, Natural Science, and Mathematics) will be encouraged, but not required, to address Human and Cultural Diversity and/or Global Context.

For a department to demonstrate that a course “addresses” either Human and Cultural Diversity or Global Context, they must 1) define one or more course-specific learning outcomes that align with the GCP cognitive learning outcomes of the selected dimension, 2) identify which of the GCP cognitive behavioral indicators are integrated into the course and 3) incorporate one or more assignments that require students to perform the selected behavioral indicators using course content. The assignment must be labeled “Global Citizen Assignment” in the syllabus and make clear to students the learning outcomes they are

expected to demonstrate. The department must also commit to assessing student learning, as outlined in Section V Assessment of the Plan.

General education courses in the designated core areas, including those already certified for the dimensions, will be reviewed and approved by the General Education Council, a standing council of the Faculty Senate, as meeting the new GCP requirements listed above through the FKL recertification process. Every five years, a course certified for general education must be recertified by the General Education Council to ensure that it continues to meet the goals of the FKL Core Curriculum. This recertification process includes the submission of course syllabi and assignments as well as explanations of how the course continues to meet the FKL dimensions for which it was originally certified. The new GCP requirements will be integrated into this existing review process beginning 2015-2016 with the official launch of the Global Citizens Project (see Appendix D for FKL course recertification form).

Course revisions needed to meet the new GCP requirements and review of these revisions will occur gradually over the five years of the Global Citizens Project on the existing recertification schedule. Academic departments will be provided with the recertification schedule so that they may plan ahead. By spring 2020, all general education courses in the core areas of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Humanities, Fine Arts, and Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context, that is 51% of all general education course offerings, will address the GCP cognitive learning outcomes. Courses that do not meet the above criteria will be decertified and can no longer be used to fulfill general education requirements. The result will be a coherent general education curriculum intentionally and meaningfully aligned with global competencies.


45


Because transfer students typically enter USF with the majority, if not all, of their general education requirements fulfilled, departments will also be encouraged, but not required, to incorporate the Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context dimensions into capstone and writing-intensive courses. This will also provide FTIC students with a culminating educational experience linking general education with the capstone learning experience. The color-coded chart in Appendix E shows the distribution of courses currently meeting these dimensions. Sixteen courses already address Human and Cultural Diversity (gold), two address Global Context (light green), and two address both (dark green). Global FKL Objective 1.2 aims to have 50% of capstone courses certified for Human and Cultural Diversity and/or Global Context by 2020. The same certification criteria and process established for general education courses will be used for capstone and writing-intensive courses. Capstone and writing-intensive courses gaining GCP certification will receive the Global Citizens course attribute in our Banner System and can be used by students toward the Global Citizen Awards (GCP Program Goal 3).

GCP Program Goal 1, Global FKL, is to

provide students with an introduction to

global competencies through the

FKL Core Curriculum.



4646

GCP Program Goal 2: Global Pathways

GCP Program Goal 2, Global Pathways, is to provide students with opportunities to practice and apply their global competencies through degree programs. To accomplish this, academic departments will be encouraged to infuse the GCP learning outcomes into required coursework of degree programs (Objective 2.1) and identify and/or develop co-curricular experiences within the degree program that align with the GCP learning outcomes (Objective 2.2). As part of this process, departments will outline a course of study incorporating the enhanced curriculum and co-curriculum, that is, a Global Pathway, which will also help students complete the requirements for the Global Citizen Awards (GCP Program Goal 3). Global Pathways will include a program-specific learning outcome aligned with the Global Citizens Project, one to three “globalized” courses required for the degree program, a curriculum map for the degree program indicating alignment of required and elective coursework, and identified global co-curricular experiences that enhance the degree program.

To integrate the GCP cognitive learning outcomes meaningfully into degree programs, Global Pathways Objective 2.1 capitalizes on Academic Learning Compacts, which are required for all baccalaureate degree programs in the State University System of Florida (BOG Regulation 8.016). Academic Learning Compacts articulate core student learning outcomes related to content/discipline knowledge and skills, communication skills, and critical thinking skills, and identify assessment tools and procedures used to measure student learning with regard to the articulated learning outcomes. Academic departments must develop an Academic Learning Compact for each degree program offered and

report on student performance annually to the Board of Governors, including how assessment results are used for program improvement. USF maintains all Academic Learning Compacts in its System of Assessment Management. For Global Pathways Objective 2.1, departments will articulate in the Academic Learning Compact a program-specific learning outcome that aligns with the GCP competencies. The program-specific global learning outcome can be a revision of an existing program learning outcome in the Academic Learning Compact or a new addition. By embedding a global learning outcome in the Academic Learning Compact, the outcome and all assessment of learning with regard to the outcome become integrated into the university’s assessment structures and processes.

To support the addition of a global learning outcome in the Academic Learning Compact, departments will also receive support to revise up to three courses required for the degree program in order to align those courses with the program-specific global learning outcome (and ultimately with the GCP learning outcomes). The globalized courses will also provide a context in which to conduct associated assessments. Using criteria and a process similar but not identical to those established for Global FKL, non-FKL courses will be reviewed and certified as meeting the GCP learning outcomes by the Undergraduate Council, a standing council of the Faculty Senate. Like FKL courses, at least one course-specific learning outcome that aligns with the GCP learning outcomes must be defined (Appendix F). Courses certified as Global Citizens courses will receive the Global Citizens attribute in the Banner System and can be used by students to fulfill requirements for the Global Citizen Awards (GCP Program Goal 3).


4747


The Global Pathways Objective 2.2 builds on existing eight semester plans, which academic departments have created for degree programs over the past three years. Eight semester plans outline the courses in which students should enroll each semester in order to complete their particular degree program in a timely fashion. Eight semester plans exist for all undergraduate degree programs offered at USF and are used by academic advisors and students in degree program planning. The Global Pathways Objective 2.2 encourages academic departments to enhance and expand upon their eight semester plans by incorporating globally focused co-curricular experiences into the plan of study. Here departments will identify existing global opportunities relevant to the major and outline new opportunities with potential for further development in alignment with the GCP learning outcomes. These opportunities include study abroad, undergraduate research, and community service. Several units on campus are partnering with the Global Citizens Project to provide support (both financial and human) for faculty to identify and/or develop appropriate experiences. These include the Office for Undergraduate Research, Education Abroad, and the Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships. Student Affairs also offers many global experiences through student organizations, the iBuddy program, community service opportunities, and the residence halls. Representatives from the Center for Student Involvement, the Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement, the Office of Multicultural Affairs, and Residential Life and Education, among other units in Student Affairs, will work with academic departments to identify and/or develop appropriate global co-curricular experiences.

Combined, the revised Academic Learning Compacts and eight semester plans create a coherent, globalized plan of study for students, that is, a Global Pathway, which connects general education with the major, and curriculum with co-curriculum, via the GCP learning outcomes. As part of developing a Global Pathway,

departments will also create a curriculum map for the degree program to demonstrate the degree to which all courses within the program align with the program-specific global learning outcome (Appendix G). Departments will also be encouraged to explore foreign language options to further enhance their degree programs, given the importance of language proficiency for developing global competencies. This could include not only recommendations for students to study a foreign language beyond the requirements for the degree but also looking into degree programs where additional foreign language study could be required within credit hour requirements for the degree. Additional features of the Global Pathway include a discipline-appropriate template of a Global Citizens portfolio for students and a communication plan for students regarding the “globalized” major. Departments will also be able to use the Global Pathway to demonstrate alignment with USF’s Strategic Goals. Departments participating in the Global Pathways component of the Global Citizens Project will present the enhanced degree program using the Global Pathway template (Appendix H), which will be posted on the GCP website.

Departments will be invited to develop Global Pathways (Objectives 2.1 and 2.2) through a call for statements of interest in fall and spring semesters. A faculty member, designated by the department, will carry primary responsibility for leading the development of the Global Pathway, with the expectation that significant input will be provided by other faculty members within the department. As faculty lead, he or she will become part of a faculty learning community consisting of other faculty leads working to develop Global Pathways. Participating departments will receive a $3500 course release for the faculty lead, a $2000 stipend for the faculty lead, and $1400 per course for course redesign (up to three courses per degree program). For more details, see Professional Development in Section III Institutional Capability.



48

GCP Program Goal 3: Global Citizen Awards

GCP Program Goal 3, Global Citizen Awards, is to provide students with opportunities to reinforce global competencies through a new Global Citizen Awards program, which rewards undergraduate participation in global curricular and co-curricular experiences. Development of the award program will include certification of new and existing non-general education courses that are redesigned to infuse the GCP learning outcomes (Objective 3.1) and identification and development of global co-curricular experiences across the university (Objective 3.2).

The award program under development consists of two levels: the Global Citizen Award and the Global Citizen Scholar Award. The awards are designed to be flexible so that any student, no matter their major or year in school (including transfer students), can minimally complete the Global Citizen Award, and so that students can pursue the kinds of activities that interest them most. These include curricular and co-curricular options. The requirements for the awards are as follows:

Global Citizen Award

1. Attendance at 8 on-campus global/cultural events

2. TWO different globally/culturally engaged activities:

• 6 credit hours of foreign language study at the intermediate level or higher

• 9 credit hours of Global Citizen coursework outside of general education

• Active participation in the Global Citizens Living Learning Community for an academic year

• Short-term study abroad (min. 1 week of a USF program)

• 45 contact hours of pre-approved globally/culturally engaged curricular or co-curricular community service

• 45 hours of globally/culturally engaged undergraduate research (~3 hrs a week during a single semester)

3. Reflection essay integrating the above experiences


49


Global Citizen Scholar Award

1. 30 contact hours of pre-approved globally/culturally engaged curricular or co-curricular community service (above Global Citizen Award requirements)

2. ONE of the following pre-approved activities:

• An additional, separate study abroad experience (min. 3 weeks of a USF program)

• Globally/culturally engaged semester-long internship

• Globally/culturally engaged research/community engagement project (IDS 4940)

• An additional 6 credit hours of foreign language study at the intermediate level or higher

• Global Citizen Capstone course

3. ONE of the following:

• Presentation at the annual Undergraduate Research and Arts Colloquium

• Culminating performance or artistic expression

• Global Citizen Portfolio

4. Reflection essay integrating the above experiences

Upon completion of the Global Citizen Award, students will be awarded a Global Citizen graduation cord and letter of congratulations from the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, which will be presented at the Celebration of Leadership Awards, sponsored annually by Student Affairs. Global Citizen awardees also become eligible to apply for a $2500 Global Citizen Study Abroad Scholarship (up to 45 awarded in the first year). Once a student has earned the Global Citizen Award, she/he can pursue the Global Citizen Scholar Award. Students who earn the Global Citizen Scholar Award will receive a Global Citizen Scholar gold medallion for commencement and a letter of congratulations from the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, which will be presented at the Celebration of Leadership Awards. Completion of the awards will appear as a comment on the student’s transcript.

As further incentive, the Office of Undergraduate Research and the Office for Community Engagement and Partnerships will dedicate a small number of their existing Undergraduate Research and Undergraduate Community Scholars awards to the Global Citizens Project to recognize students pursuing globally engaged research and/or community service. The Global Citizens Project will match these awards.



50

The Global Citizen Awards take advantage of the many ongoing global and cultural activities at USF and provide students with a meaningful way to integrate these experiences into their undergraduate studies. The awards are intentionally designed as a “program” into which students opt. Participating students become part of a community organized through Canvas, USF’s learning management system. The Global Citizen Awards Canvas organization will serve as students’ main resource for award information and submission of award materials or evidence of completion. Interested students will first attend a “Getting Started” workshop to explore the benefits of global competencies and to familiarize them with the award requirements and the manner in which progress toward the award is tracked and recorded. They will then receive a web link allowing them to enroll in the Canvas organization. The Canvas organization is broken into individual instruction modules for each component of the Global Citizen Award (e.g., events, community service, etc.). The modules provide on-going information and answers to common questions. In addition, each instructional module includes an “assignment” that enables students to upload their evidence of completion (e.g., a co-curricular transcript highlighting their involvement and hours of globally focused service projects). (Appendix I provides step-by-step details on the process for declaring and completing the Global Citizen Awards.) Short reflections required upon completion of each requirement compel students to explore their learning and development with regard to the GCP learning outcomes. The Global Citizen Scholar Award, in particular, serves as a culminating experience in which a student applies their global competencies in a significant, in-depth way.


51


E. Benefits to USF and Our StudentsThe Global Citizens Project is designed to prepare students for success in a global society. We will accomplish this by enhancing students’ global competencies, as outlined in the GCP Learning Outcomes flowchart, through the various program improvements and opportunities under development as part of the three GCP program goals. Students will benefit from the Global Citizens Project not only through their enhanced global competencies, but also through their ability to recognize and articulate those competencies and the connections among their experiences. Explicit global learning outcomes at all levels of coursework will foster these abilities, reinforced by designated global citizen assignments. The obvious connections between general education and the degree program will likely aid in students’ understanding of the importance of general education for preparing them for the major. Students will learn the value of the globalized major through the Global Pathways initiative.

USF will benefit from the Global Citizens Project from the greater alignment of curricula and programs with the institution’s mission and strategic plan. There will be direct evidence of student learning gains tied explicitly to institutional goals and priorities. Coherence and intentionality will characterize the university’s core curriculum. Staff, as well as faculty and students, will have opportunities to actively participate in advancing the institution’s strategic goals through the various activities of the Global Citizen Awards program. In short, the university will be able to demonstrate several ways in which it is accomplishing its mission “to deliver competitive undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs, to generate knowledge, foster intellectual development, and ensure student success in a global environment.”



52


52


FOR THE INITIATION, IMPLEMENTATION, AND COMPLETION OF THE PLAN


52


52

A. GCP Administrative Structure Overall administration of the Global Citizens Project will be maintained by the Office of Undergraduate Studies, working in collaboration with other units on campus. As the academic unit responsible for undergraduate programs and curricula that crosscut academic colleges, including the FKL Core Curriculum, the Office of Undergraduate Studies is the appropriate unit to house the Global Citizens Project. A GCP Advisory Board will provide support and guidance on matters of the Global Citizens Project.

The Global Citizens Project will be administered by an Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies and an Assessment specialist with assistance from two Ph.D. graduate assistants and an administrative support specialist (Figure 10). The Office of Undergraduate Studies will physically house all five staff members in its office suite in the Student Services Building (SVC 2002). The Office of Undergraduate Studies recently underwent renovations to accommodate its growing staff. Individual office space now exists for the Assessment specialist and administrative support specialist, in addition to the Associate Dean for whom office space was already allocated. A shared office space has also been created for the graduate assistants who will share a desk and computer, working on an alternating schedule.

The Associate Dean will lead the implementation of the Global Citizens Project, including overseeing the Global Citizen Awards program, working with the General Education Council and the Undergraduate Council to facilitate Global Citizens certification of individual courses, working with academic departments to develop Global Pathways, partnering with the Academy for Teaching and Learning Excellence in the development and delivery of professional development opportunities for faculty and staff, and collaborating with other student success and academic units to award scholarships and grants to faculty and students for global engagement activities. The Associate Dean will supervise the Assessment specialist, the graduate assistants, and the administrative support specialist. The Associate Dean will report to the Provost and Executive Vice President through the Dean of Undergraduate Studies.

Dr. Karla Davis-Salazar, Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies, has been selected to lead the Global Citizens Project. Dr. Davis-Salazar has been leading the development of the QEP as Chair of the QEP Steering Committee and will provide continuity from development to implementation and completion of the QEP. Dr. Davis-Salazar’s current responsibilities include administering the FKL Core Curriculum (20% FTE), directing the Global Citizenship General Education Program (15% FTE), and serving as an Undergraduate Studies representative on several university councils and committees, among other duties (5% FTE), in addition to leading QEP development (60% FTE). The Global Citizenship General Education Program will conclude in spring 2015, allowing her to allocate another 15% of her time to the Global Citizens Project for a 75% GCP appointment.

The GCP Assessment specialist will be responsible for the assessment and evaluation of the Global Citizens Project. This is a full-time position that will involve overseeing the administration of all assessments of student learning, coordinating the development and administration of course-embedded assessments, developing an operational system for submission of assessment data, analyzing and reporting all assessment data, and monitoring and reporting performance metrics. The Assessment specialist will also be responsible for assessment of the FKL Core



53

Curriculum, working in collaboration with the Assessment Subcommittee of the General Education Council. The Assessment specialist will be hired in summer 2015 with a start date of July 1. This will be an internal and external search, open to individuals holding a Ph.D. in higher education or a related field. Experience in assessment and/or measurement and evaluation is required.

A full-time administrative support specialist will be responsible for supporting the administration of the Global Citizens Project and the FKL Core Curriculum. This will include meeting coordination and minute keeping; database maintenance and creation; tracking of new course and recertification proposals and approvals; generation of reports and charts of various kinds (e.g., course enrollments, recertification scheduling); travel coordination; and other faculty and program support. The position will report directly to the Associate Dean and will also involve working closely with the Chair of the General Education Council. Currently, administrative support is provided through a temporary position, which will be converted to a permanent staff position at the start of the 2015-2016 fiscal year. The position opening will be advertised and filled during spring 2015.

The GCP graduate assistants will maintain the Canvas organization associated with the Global Citizen Awards program and manage the GCP website content, in addition to providing general support for the Associate Dean and GCP Assessment specialist. Specific tasks will also include identifying and approving on-campus global/cultural events; organizing and facilitating Global Citizen Award workshops; meeting individually with students as needed to address general questions pertaining to the award; developing supplementary programming to support students’ completion of the Global Citizen Award; and collaborating with campus partners as appropriate to facilitate students’ post-award activities and honors. The GCP graduate assistantships will be one-year, 20-hour/week appointments.

A GCP Advisory Board will serve in an advisory capacity for the Global Citizens Project as a whole. Its role will be to provide informed guidance and input to the Associate Dean on the policies, procedures, and activities of the Global Citizens Project and to advocate for the Global Citizens Project in broader university initiatives and activities. The board will also be responsible for reviewing applications and making recommendations to the Associate Dean regarding course redesign and Global Pathway funding (see Professional Development below). Because of the broad range of activities involved in the Global Citizens Project, the GCP Advisory Board will be composed of a cross-section of university constituencies (administrators, faculty, staff, and students). During the first year of the Global Citizens Project (2015-2016), the advisory board will meet monthly, with the board determining its meeting schedule thereafter. Length of membership terms and operating procedures will also be determined by the board.


54


FIGURE 10. GCP ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

B. GCP Professional Development Significant resources are dedicated to professional development for faculty and staff. The Academy for Teaching and Learning Excellence provides professional development opportunities for faculty and graduate students. The office is staffed by a Director, an Assistant Director, and two full-time Learning and Development Facilitators (i.e., faculty developers). To ensure sufficient professional development support for the Global Citizens Project, two new Learning and Development Facilitators will be hired in spring/summer 2015. The GCP Learning and Development Facilitators will be responsible for developing appropriate content for the professional development opportunities described below. These include an annual Global Citizens workshop, Global Citizens course redesign cohorts, Global Pathway learning communities, and the Adventures in Global Topics series. In addition, an annual Global Citizens conference for the broader university community will be held beginning Year 2 (2016-2017) of the Global Citizens Project.

Provost and Executive Vice President

Ralph Wilcox

Dean of Undergraduate Studies

W. Robert Sullins

Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies

Karla Davis-SalazarGeneral Education Council GCP Advisory Board

GCP Assessment Specialist

Graduate AssistantGraduate Assistant

GCP Administrative Support



55

Annual Global Citizens Workshop

The annual Global Citizens Workshop will be a two-day kickoff event for faculty and staff occurring at the start of each fall semester. It will serve to introduce the Global Citizens Project, GCP learning outcomes and program goals, and avenues for participating in the Global Citizens Project. Breakout sessions will provide additional information on course and curriculum redesign in general and pedagogical methods best suited to fostering a global perspective. It is expected that faculty who wish to participate in either the Global Citizens course redesign cohorts or the Global Pathway learning communities will have first attended this workshop.

Global Citizens Course Redesign Cohorts

Global Citizens course redesign cohorts provide support for faculty seeking to align individual courses with the GCP learning outcomes. Cohorts will work with the GCP Learning and Development Facilitators to explore a range of relevant topics, such as defining student learning outcomes, problem-based and comparative approaches to global learning, “globalizing” syllabi, and researching global content. Cohorts will be composed of up to 10 faculty members per cohort with two cohorts running simultaneously in the fall and spring semesters and one cohort running in the summer. Faculty will receive $1400 for their work, which includes attending the annual Global Citizens workshop, participating in monthly cohort meetings, and successfully certifying a Global Citizens course. The budget provides funding for up to 35 faculty in Year 1 and 50 faculty per year thereafter. Faculty will be selected to participate in a redesign cohort by the Associate Dean in concert with the GCP Advisory Board through an application process.

Global Pathway Learning Communities

Global Pathway learning communities provide support for faculty leading the development of a Global Pathway for a degree program in their home department. These learning communities will work with the GCP Learning and Development facilitators and other units on campus to define program-level global learning outcomes, create curriculum maps, and identify and/or develop global co-curricular opportunities, among other activities. The learning communities will be composed of up to five faculty leads per community with one learning community running in the fall semester and one running in the spring semester. Members of the learning community will receive $2000 for their work, which includes attending the annual Global Citizens workshop, participating in monthly learning community meetings, and submitting a completed Global Pathway.

Adventures in Global Topics Series

The Adventures in Global Topics series is designed for individuals from the broader university community (administrators, faculty, staff, and students) who seek to learn more about particular regions of the world or topics of global significance. Each topic is presented as a short “course,” consisting of a one-hour lecture presented by a USF faculty expert followed by a one-hour faculty development event led by a GCP Learning and Development Facilitator. The lecture portion will provide background and actionable information about regions on Earth so that attendees can become educated on geography, culture, politics, and current events, while the faculty development event assists participants in learning how to incorporate the information into programs, courses, and curricula.


56


The faculty experts will receive $1000 for their work, which includes presenting the lecture and collaborating with the GCP Learning and Development Facilitator to design and lead the follow-up faculty development event.

Annual Global Citizens Conference

The annual Global Citizens Conference is an opportunity for the USF community at large to showcase accomplishments and activities related to the Global Citizens Project. This one-day event, hosted in the spring, will feature a nationally recognized keynote speaker and sessions dedicated to faculty, staff, and student achievements, including model course redesigns and Global Pathways and student perspectives on their global experiences. The conference will be organized and hosted by the Global Citizens Project with assistance from USF World and the Academy for Teaching and Learning Excellence.

C. GCP Budget The GCP budget is divided into two years of planning, five years of implementation, and one year beyond the Fifth Year Impact Report (Table 10). All monies come from Education and General funds and, with the exception of in-kind resources, represent new commitments or reallocated funds. Existing funds from the program planning years will become recurring beginning in 2015-2016 and will be supplemented with an initial $344,100 increase in recurring funding in the same year. Small increases in recurring funding are anticipated, as needed, each year thereafter.

In-kind support supplements the GCP budget and derives from several units on campus. The temporary administrative support specialist is currently split between QEP and SACSCOC budgets. With the conversion of this position to a permanent one, the SACSCOC portion of this salary and benefits will become part of the GCP recurring budget. The Office of Undergraduate Studies will contribute $116,000 per year for study abroad scholarships, in addition to the partial salary of the Associate Dean. The scholarship money is from the Global Citizenship General Education Program but will be redirected to the Global Citizens Project once the Global Citizenship General Education Program ends in spring 2015. The Office for Undergraduate Research and the Office for Community Engagement and Partnerships will dedicate two undergraduate research awards ($250/award) and two community service awards ($1500/award) per year, respectively, to the Global Citizens Project to recognize students engaged in these high impact practices. These offices will also dedicate four CREATTE Scholars grants ($2000/grant) and two community engagement faculty grants ($1000/grant) to support faculty integrating undergraduate research and service learning into coursework. The Global Citizens Project will match the grants provided by these offices.

Significant resources are dedicated to professional

development for faculty and staff.



57

TABLE 10. GCP BUDGET PLANNING IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION REPORTING

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

2013-2014

2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2013-2021

Total by Category QEP

Base QEP Base In-Kind QEP

Base Increase Request

Total Budget In-Kind QEP










Total Budget

Personnel Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies 75% time/benefits 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 623,160

Support Staff (including benefits) 22,400 22,400 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 313,600 Graduate Assistant 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 144,000 Benefits (10%) 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 3,600 Assessment Specialist 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 360,000 Benefits (25%) 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 Graduate Assistant - new 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 108,000 Benefits (10%) 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 10,800 Faculty Developers (2) 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 720,000 Benefits (25%) 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Operating CostsMaterials & Supplies 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 40,000 Marketing & Communications 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Assessment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 140,000 Travel 15,000 15,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,000 Faculty and Staff DevelopmentFaculty Incentives 10,000 - - - - - - 10,000 Faculty Development 10,000 - - - - - - 10,000 Pilots 35,000 - - - - - - 35,000 Annual Global Citizens Workshop 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 12,000 Adventures lectures ($1000 stipend/leader) 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 24,000 Faculty Cohorts and Learning Communities 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 18,000 Library Enhancements 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Guest Speakers/Matching Funds 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 Spring Annual Conference - 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 Program Goal 1: Global FKL*CREATTE Scholars ($2000/course) 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 96,000 *Community Engagement Faculty Grants ($1000/grant) 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 24,000

*Capstone Experience Development/ Redesign ($1400/course) 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 84,000

Program Goal 2: Global Pathways (55 programs total)Course Release ($3500/program) 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 192,500 Faculty Lead Stipend ($2000/faculty lead) 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Course Development/Redesign ($1400/course; 3 courses/program) 5,000 10,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 15,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 190,000

Program Goal 3: Global Citizen Awards*Study Abroad Scholarships ($2500 each) 116,000 116,000 116,000 12,500 128,500 116,000 12,500 12,500 141,000 116,000 25,000 12,500 153,500 116,000 37,500 12,500 166,000 116,000 50,000 12,500 178,500 883,500 Graduation Medallions and Cords 3,000 3,000 3,000 1,000 4,000 4,000 1,000 5,000 5,000 1,000 6,000 6,000 1,000 7,000 7,000 1,000 8,000 33,000 *Office of Undergraduate Research Awards ($250/award) 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000

*Undergraduate Community Scholars Fellowship ($1500/award) 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 36,000

Course Development/Redesign ($1400/course) 1,000 20,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 126,000

Website Development & Maintenance 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000

TOTALS PER YEAR 90,400 125,400 260,760 125,400 344,100 730,260 265,760 469,500 61,000 796,260 265,760 530,500 13,500 807,960 265,760 544,000 13,500 821,460 265,760 557,500 13,500 834,960 265,760 571,000 13,500 848,460 5,055,160

*High-impact educational practice


58


PLANNING IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION REPORTING Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

2013-2014

2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2013-2021

Total by Category QEP

Base QEP Base In-Kind QEP












Total Budget

Personnel Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies 75% time/benefits 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 103,860 623,160

Support Staff (including benefits) 22,400 22,400 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 22,400 22,400 44,800 313,600 Graduate Assistant 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 144,000 Benefits (10%) 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 3,600 Assessment Specialist 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 360,000 Benefits (25%) 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 Graduate Assistant - new 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 108,000 Benefits (10%) 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 10,800 Faculty Developers (2) 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 720,000 Benefits (25%) 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Operating CostsMaterials & Supplies 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 40,000 Marketing & Communications 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Assessment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 140,000 Travel 15,000 15,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,000 Faculty and Staff DevelopmentFaculty Incentives 10,000 - - - - - - 10,000 Faculty Development 10,000 - - - - - - 10,000 Pilots 35,000 - - - - - - 35,000 Annual Global Citizens Workshop 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 12,000 Adventures lectures ($1000 stipend/leader) 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 24,000 Faculty Cohorts and Learning Communities 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 18,000 Library Enhancements 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Guest Speakers/Matching Funds 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 Spring Annual Conference - 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 Program Goal 1: Global FKL*CREATTE Scholars ($2000/course) 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 96,000 *Community Engagement Faculty Grants ($1000/grant) 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 24,000

*Capstone Experience Development/ Redesign ($1400/course) 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 84,000

Program Goal 2: Global Pathways (55 programs total)Course Release ($3500/program) 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 192,500 Faculty Lead Stipend ($2000/faculty lead) 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Course Development/Redesign ($1400/course; 3 courses/program) 5,000 10,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 15,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 10,000 25,000 35,000 190,000

Program Goal 3: Global Citizen Awards*Study Abroad Scholarships ($2500 each) 116,000 116,000 116,000 12,500 128,500 116,000 12,500 12,500 141,000 116,000 25,000 12,500 153,500 116,000 37,500 12,500 166,000 116,000 50,000 12,500 178,500 883,500 Graduation Medallions and Cords 3,000 3,000 3,000 1,000 4,000 4,000 1,000 5,000 5,000 1,000 6,000 6,000 1,000 7,000 7,000 1,000 8,000 33,000 *Office of Undergraduate Research Awards ($250/award) 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000

*Undergraduate Community Scholars Fellowship ($1500/award) 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000 36,000

Course Development/Redesign ($1400/course) 1,000 20,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 126,000

Website Development & Maintenance 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000

TOTALS PER YEAR 90,400 125,400 260,760 125,400 344,100 730,260 265,760 469,500 61,000 796,260 265,760 530,500 13,500 807,960 265,760 544,000 13,500 821,460 265,760 557,500 13,500 834,960 265,760 571,000 13,500 848,460 5,055,160

*High-impact educational practice



59

D. GCP Implementation Timeline A detailed implementation timeline for the Global Citizens Project has been developed for fall 2014 through summer 2021 (Table 11). The timeline includes a planning year (AY 2014-2015) and one year beyond submission of the Fifth Year Impact Report (AY 2020-2021), in addition to the five years of the QEP (2015-2025). The timeline is divided into strategic areas to facilitate monitoring of progress toward program goals.

TABLE 11. GCP IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

YR Semester Professional Development Global FKL Global Pathways Global Citizen

Awards Assessment Administration Marketing

Year

0 -

AY 2

014-

2015

Fall 2014 • outline faculty development needs

• establish criteria for Global FKL

• establish criteria for course revision

• establish criteria for GC courses

• establish administrative structure

• establish scholarship criteria

• refine assessment plans

• refine student learning outcomes

• set performance metrics targets

• establish GCP administrative structure

• create GCP website• create 2nd QEP

video• article in USF

Magazine

Spring 2015 • initiate search for faculty developers

• pilot course redesign cohorts

• pilot Global FKL with 2 gen ed courses

• pilot Global FKL with 2 capstone courses

• pilot 2 global pathways development

• pilot learning communities

• pilot documentation of events

• pilot review of GC courses

• create Canvas organization

• administer GPI to establish baseline

• develop rubrics• refine student

learning outcomes

• publish and submit QEP

• initiate search for Assessment specialist

• initiate search for administrative support

• launch 2nd QEP video

• article on USF homepage

• update/revise GCP website

Summer 2015 • hire faculty developers

• revise course redesign cohorts

• revise Global FKL criteria based on pilot

• revise criteria based on pilot

• revise learning communities

• develop website

• administer GPI to study abroad students

• analyze GPI data• pilot and revise

rubrics

• hire Assessment specialist

• hire administrative support specialist

• develop program evaluation schedule

• advertise awards at Orientation

• advertise professional development

Year

1 -

AY 2

015-

2016

Fall 2015 • pilot Adventures lectures

• launch 2 course design cohorts

• revise 14 gen ed courses

• recruit and revise 5 capstone courses

• work with 5 depts. to develop plan

• run 1 learning community

• formally launch award program

• recruit and revise 10 courses

• administer GPI to first-year students

• use rubric and collect data in gen ed

• survey redesign cohorts and learning community

• appoint Advisory Board

• hire Ph.D. graduate assistant

• review/select spring funding proposals


• solicit summer funding proposals

Spring 2016 • conduct 2 Adventures lectures

• run 2 course redesign cohorts






• GC spotlight at UR Colloquium

• administer GPI to seniors

• use rubric in GC courses and collect data

• survey course redesign cohorts

• monthly Advisory Board meeting

• review/select summer funding proposals


• solicit fall funding proposals

Summer 2016 • plan fall workshop• begin planning 1st

annual conference• run 1 course

redesign cohort

• offer 46 scholarships • administer GPI to study abroad students

• analyze GPI and rubric data

• analyze survey data


• prepare AY 2015-2016 report

• review/select fall funding proposals


• solicit spring funding proposals

Year

2 -

AY 2

016-

2017

Fall 2016 • pilot fall workshop• conduct 2

Adventures lectures• run 2 course

redesign cohorts







• use rubric in gen ed and collect data

• Advisory Board meetings





• hold 1st annual conference














Summer 2017 • conduct summer 2017 workshop

• begin planning 2nd annual conference

• run 1 course redesign cohort










60


YR Semester Professional Development

Global FKL Global Pathways Global Citizens Awards

Assessment Administration Marketing

Year

3 -

AY 2

017-

2018

Fall 2017 • run fall workshop• conduct 2


redesign cohorts













• hold 2nd annual conference





• run 1 learning com-munity










• begin planning 3rd annual conference










Year

4 -

AY 2

018-

2019



redesign cohorts













• hold 3rd annual conference














• begin planning 3rd annual conference










Year

5 -

AY 2

019-

2020

Fall 2019 • run fall workshop • recruit and revise 5 capstone courses






• conduct 2 Adventures lectures

• revision of 80 gen ed courses complete








• target of 47 majors achieved





• hold 4th annual conference

• revision of 52 capstone courses complete




• prepare/submit QEP Impact Report


• run 2 course rede-sign cohorts


• target of 100 courses achieved



• begin planning 5th annual conference


• award 66 scholarships

• administer GPI to study abroad students








Year

6 -

AY 2

020-

2021



redesign cohorts











• hold 5th annual conference













• award 71 scholarships






• advertise program at Orientation



61


61

IV. BROAD-BASED INVOLVEMENT

OF INSTITUTIONAL CONSTITUENCIES


61


61

The development of the Global Citizens Project was a recursive process occurring over the course of a year and a half, involving a broad base of university stakeholders, and incorporating campus opinion and expertise as well as review of the literature on global learning. The process began with the initial drafting of learning outcomes, which then guided the development of the program goals and objectives and the assessment plan (Figure 11). The 31-member QEP Steering Committee, described in Section I Institutional Process, was the body charged with the selection, development, and implementation of the QEP. Ultimately, the QEP Steering Committee called upon various individuals and groups to provide input on what it means to be a global citizen and to develop the program goals and objectives to enhance students’ learning in the area of global citizenship. Throughout the process, frequent updates were also presented to various university-wide councils and committees, including the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, Faculty Senate, Campus Leadership Council, Board of Trustees Academic and Campus Environment Workgroup, Council of Deans, Council of Chairs, Council of Academic Advisors, Student Government, Associate Deans Council, Undergraduate Council, General Education Council, Student Affairs Leadership Team, Staff Senate, and USF Library, among others. College- and department-level units also were updated on the progress of the QEP over the year and a half of plan development.

Methods used to solicit input from the university community included:

• a dedicated website and email account

• student discussions and questionnaires (292 participants)

• a campus-wide survey (428 respondents)

• faculty focus groups on student learning outcomes (50 participants)

• town halls (25 participants)

• academic advisor focus groups (10 participants)

• curriculum and co-curriculum development teams (21 participants)

• a small team sent to the 2014 AAC&U Institute on General Education and Assessment (6 participants)

• three implementation teams, one for each of the GCP goals (32 participants)

• Student Government focus groups (60 participants).

A website (www.usf.edu/qep) and email account ([email protected]) dedicated to the QEP were established in the fall of 2013. These were designed to disseminate information about the development of the QEP, including SACSCOC standards and processes, and to provide a mechanism by which the university community could submit questions and comments. As development of the QEP progressed, the website evolved to focus on the content and strategies of the Global Citizens Project, using a new website address (www.usf.edu/gcp). All marketing materials direct users to the Global Citizens Project website.

As a first step in developing student learning outcomes, QEP Steering Committee members individually brainstormed concepts and skills relevant to global citizenship, which were then compiled and reviewed for commonalities. Faculty members of the QEP Steering Committee also held class discussions and posed a set of questions to their students regarding the qualities and characteristics of a global citizen. A total of 292 students responded in writing to these questions. Their responses are summarized in Appendix J. The QEP Steering Committee constructs and



62

FIGURE 11. QEP PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE

2013

2014

2015

June

July

Aug

.S

ept.

Oct

.N

ov.

Dec

.Ja

n.Fe

b.M

arch

Apr

ilM

ayJu

neJu

lyA

ug.

Sep

t.O

ct.

Nov

.D

ec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar

chA

pril

May

Sel

ectio

n of

Q

EP

Topi

c

Dev

elop

men

t of

Le

arni

ng O

utco

mes

•◊

◊◊

◊

QE

P C

ampu

s S

urve

y

Dev

elop

men

t of

Pr

ogra

m G

oals

• •

○ ○

•SA

CS

CO

C A

dvis

ory

Vis

it

Writ

ing/

Rev

isin

g/E

ditin

g Q

EP

D

ocum

ent

Dev

elop

men

t of

Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

nX

Dev

elop

men

t of

Pr

ofes

sion

al

Dev

elop

men

t P

lan

Dev

elop

men

t of

A

sses

smen

t P

lan

•SA

CS

CO

C A

nnua

l M

eetin

g

Pilo

ting

of P

rogr

am

Goa

ls

Sub

mis

sion

of

QE

P

On-

Site

R

eaffi

rmat

ion

Vis

it

* S

tude

nt D

iscu

ssio

n/Q

uest

ionn

aire

s◊

Facu

lty F

ocus

Gro

ups

on L

earn

ing

Out

com

es•

QE

P To

wn

Hal

ls○

Aca

dem

ic A

dvis

or F

ocus

Gro

ups

X A

AC

&U

Inst

itute

on

Gen

eral

Edu

catio

n an

d A

sses

smen

t


63


student responses were then compared to student learning outcomes found in the relevant literature as well as other globally focused QEPs. Working from this information, the QEP Steering Committee identified an existing set of student learning outcomes found in Boix Mansilla and Jackson (2011) Educating for Global Competence: Preparing Our Youth to Engage the World that seemed to capture the various concepts and skills generated by the QEP Steering Committee and USF students as well as those found in the literature. The student learning outcomes included in the Boix Mansilla and Jackson 2011 list are: Investigate the World, Recognize Perspectives, Communicate Ideas, and Take Action. Although this publication is aimed at K-12 students, it served as a structured starting point for further discussion. The QEP Steering Committee also felt it important to add the two dimensions of USF’s FKL Core Curriculum, Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context, to the Boix Mansilla and Jackson 2011 list since these two dimensions had been generated by USF faculty during the development of USF’s general education curriculum as part of the 2005 QEP. The QEP Steering Committee used this combined list to establish a working set of learning outcomes from which to proceed, with the understanding that the learning outcomes would be refined throughout the QEP development process.

Using the working set of learning outcomes as a guide, the QEP Steering Committee designed an online survey to solicit specific ideas about potential strategies for globalizing the curriculum. The survey was sent to all university employees and students. A total of 428 people responded. The survey requested ideas for program additions, changes, and/or enhancements that might contribute to the development and enhancement of students’ global competencies, as defined above, in the areas of curriculum (general education, majors, capstone experience), co-curriculum (housing, dining, career services, etc.), community partnerships, undergraduate research, and study abroad (Appendix K). Respondents were also provided the opportunity to comment on any other aspect of the QEP.

Following comments received by the QEP Steering Committee, it became clear that it was important to the university community that the learning outcomes be meaningful and specific to USF. Thus, the QEP Steering Committee decided to focus on the existing dimensions, Human and Cultural Diversity and Global Context, as the learning outcomes for the Global Citizens Project. A subset of the faculty on the QEP Steering Committee therefore worked to flesh out the knowledge and skills associated with these two dimensions and draft an initial set of outcomes.

Over 100 faculty teaching general education courses were then invited to provide feedback on the draft set of learning outcomes. From the 50 respondents, two focus groups were formed (Appendix A2) – one for Human and Cultural Diversity and one for Global Context – based on the dimension for which their general education course(s) were certified. Each group met twice to discuss and rework the drafts. The QEP Steering Committee then revised the learning outcomes, incorporating this faculty input. It should be noted here that, throughout the development of the Global Citizens Project, the GCP learning outcomes continued to be revised and refined. Models developed by other institutions and organizations were influential. AAC&U’s (2007) work on global learning was especially important, and the AAC&U Global Learning VALUE Rubric (AAC&U 2014), in particular, furthered our efforts to clarify what we consider to be most important for our students to know and be able to do. Learning outcomes associated with other globally focused QEPs (especially those referenced in Table 6) also helped us to narrow our focus.



64

With draft learning outcomes and an initial list of ideas for enhancing the curriculum and co-curriculum, the QEP Steering Committee then formed two development teams: the QEP Curriculum Development Team and the QEP Co-Curriculum Development Team. These teams were tasked with reviewing the input provided by the university community, researching best practices related to global citizenship, and ultimately proposing specific strategies that could be implemented to enhance students’ learning related to global citizenship. These teams were composed of faculty with experience in curriculum development, general education, and/or global citizenship, and student affairs professionals with direct oversight of key areas of the co-curriculum, including Career Services, Veteran Services, Multicultural Affairs, Orientation, and First Year Experience (Appendices A3 and A4). Each team met every other week throughout the spring 2014 semester, sharing information and progress along the way.

The QEP Curriculum and Co-curriculum Teams established guidelines to frame their work. Most important was the recognition that the development of students as global citizens requires an integrated, extended approach infused throughout the undergraduate experience from orientation to graduation. Other guidelines included:

1) No new requirements for students that would increase the number of credit hours required for the baccalaureate will be instituted.

2) No increase in the total number of general education course offerings will occur.

3) Curricular and co-curricular opportunities should support each other.

4) Significant faculty and staff development will be necessary.

5) A clear, rigorous assessment plan must be meaningfully built in.

6) Transfer students should be included.

7) Co-curricular experiences will not be required for graduation.

The importance of foreign language proficiency for global competence was also raised throughout the development of the Global Citizens Project. It was recognized that students are limited in the number of credits hours they can take due to state-mandated excess credit hour surcharges, but faculty and administrators alike agreed that we need to find ways to make it possible for students to study a foreign language.

Working from the above guidelines, best practices, and the campus survey responses, the teams quickly identified general education, the majors, and the co-curriculum as three areas to target for the broadest and most sustained impact. By the end of the spring 2014 semester the teams had developed the initial drafts of the three program goals of the Global Citizens Project: Global FKL, Global Pathways, and Global Citizen Awards.

To engage campus stakeholders further, the QEP Steering Committee gave formal presentations to the Campus Leadership Council and Faculty Senate and led two town hall meetings open to all faculty and staff. During these presentations and town halls, the Chair of the QEP Steering Committee provided an overview of the role of the QEP in the reaffirmation process and an explanation of the development of the Global Citizens Project, including broad participation, student learning outcomes, and the three program goals. Each of these groups provided feedback that was then incorporated into the Global Citizens Project. Special focus groups dedicated to academic advisors were also held to gain their perspective on the three program goals (Appendix A5). Their input helped to shape the Global Citizen Awards and Global Pathways goals, in particular.


65


To advance the Global FKL goal, a team of administrators and faculty participated in AAC&U’s Institute on General Education and Assessment in June 2014 (Appendix A6). This week-long institute enabled the team to dedicate significant quality time to refining the learning outcomes, drafting an accompanying rubric, designing sample assignments, and outlining a process for incorporating the GCP learning outcomes into general education. The expertise of the AAC&U Institute leaders also proved valuable for considering best practices. Upon return to USF, it was clear the team had made substantial progress toward developing necessary components for implementation of the Global FKL goal.

With the three program goals delineated, focus shifted to developing implementation plans during mid-summer to early fall of 2014. Three implementation teams were formed, one for each of the three goals. These teams were tasked with developing plans for carrying out the goals and accompanying objectives developed by the QEP Curriculum and Co-Curriculum Development Teams. The implementation teams were composed of current and former members of the General Education Council (for the Global FKL goal); department chairs, associate chairs, and undergraduate directors from academic departments that had not yet been involved in the QEP process (for the Global Pathways goal); and a mix of administrators, student affairs professionals, and faculty all directly tied to the Global Citizen Awards (for the Global Citizen Award goal). An academic advisor and representative from Student Government were also on each of the implementation teams. Appendices A7, A8, and A9 list these participants.

Each team approached their work differently. Much of the criteria for the Global FKL goal had been developed by the QEP Curriculum Development Team and the AAC&U team, so the Global FKL Implementation Team dedicated itself to developing the process by which the General Education Council would review courses using the new criteria. The Global Pathways Implementation Team preferred to discuss criteria and process and to make recommendations to the Chair who then incorporated them into draft materials. The Global Citizen Awards Implementation Team broke into subcommittees dedicated to the different parts of the award (e.g., Events, Research, Community Service, Study Abroad, Portfolios). The task of each subcommittee was to develop definitions and criteria used to evaluate its respective area, methods and processes to track student progress, an assessment plan, and student-friendly communication materials. As the implementation teams carried out their work, focus groups with Student Government provided additional feedback on the requirements and rewards of the Global Citizen Awards.

By mid to late September 2014, the implementation teams had drafted implementation plans for each of the three goals and accompanying objectives. These plans included identifying and/or creating structures and processes as well as establishing criteria where appropriate. The Chair of the QEP Steering Committee presented the implementation plans to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, Faculty Senate, Student Government Senate, General Education Council, and Undergraduate Council. On September 15, 2014, the General Education Council approved the Global FKL goal, objectives, and implementation process. On September 22, 2014, the Undergraduate Council approved the process for certifying non-general education courses as Global Citizen courses as part of the Global Pathways and Global Citizen Awards goals. On September 23, 2014, Student Government Senate passed a Joint Resolution in Recognition of the Quality Enhancement Plan (Appendix L). The Faculty Senate Executive Committee voted in support of the Global Citizens Project on November 5, 2014. Finally, on January 13, 2015, the Faculty Senate approved the Global Citizens Project.



66


66

V. ASSESSMENT OF THE PLAN


66


66

A. GCP AssessmentA comprehensive assessment plan has been outlined for the Global Citizens Project based on the conceptual model and accompanying learning outcomes described in Section II Focus of the Plan. Three features guide the assessment plan. They are as follows:

1. The model of global citizenship must have concomitant pedagogical, curricular, and co-curricular relationships while providing opportunities for innovation.

2. The model must progress from cognitive and affective domains of knowing and feeling to the conative domain of willingness to act, behavioral components, which lead to the third feature below.

3. The model must be assessable with clearly defined methodology and instrumentation at each level.

Each of these features provided the stringent guidelines under which the Global Citizens Project was developed. The result is a theoretically and methodologically sound project.

I. What to Measure

The first step in developing an assessable model was to create a conceptual framework that could be clearly connected to the educational structure of USF while opening doors to new and innovative ways of structuring educational experiences. The idea was to create ways of working within established and robust theoretical frameworks as well as the current academic environment of shrinking fiscal resources while making it not only feasible but rewarding to create new ways of approaching the goal of providing every undergraduate student with the opportunity to become a global citizen.

The conceptual model, explained in Section II Focus of the Plan, is based on the theoretically sound assumption that, if a student successfully completes the outcomes at each of the three stages (Global Awareness, Global Responsibility, and Global Participation) as measured by the assessment process, the result will be a well-educated global citizen. It was imperative then that at each stage of development we asked the question, “How will this be assessed?”

Before discussing how the learning outcomes will be assessed, a few characteristics of the outcomes and behavioral indicators should be noted:

• Learning outcomes and behavioral indicators are specific and characterized by action verbs or cognitive activities denoting something the student must be able to do or an action to be completed.

• Action verbs assure that there is a measurable behavior or student output attached to each outcome.

• Outcomes are theoretically and methodologically aligned with the overall goals of the Global Citizens Project.

• Outcomes readily lend themselves to the development or selection of robust instruments used to measure changes in student learning.



67

In addition, the following features of the GCP cognitive learning outcomes should be noted:

• Following Bloom’s Taxonomy, cognitive levels are of increasing complexity with each level coinciding with Bloom’s descriptions applied here to elements of global concern.

• Knowledge is based on mastery of factual information typically transmitted in lower-level courses. The connection with self-awareness in the affective/conative domain is that underlying the development of knowledge using emerging social-cognitive skills leads to self-awareness in new contexts.

• Analysis requires that students develop skills aimed at differentiation of knowledge-based global issues and are capable of comparing and contrasting aspects of the geopolitical and cultural systems. The connection with willingness in the affective/conative domain is based on the hypothesis that as one becomes increasingly capable of differentiating components of previously unfamiliar contexts, one is more likely to become motivated to engage them.

• Synthesis requires students to internalize and reorder both self and environment as they become increasingly skilled in the analysis of new contextual relationships. The concept of synthetic thought emerged from the Hegelian and Kantian idea that as cognitive structures are tested against new ideas and concepts, new ways of thinking about the subject (student) in the subject-object (self-other or self-environment) relationship are developed. The connection with practice in the affective/conative domain is based on the hypothesis that as students become more competent in incorporating new perspectives and communicating with a wider more global audience, they will turn willingness to act into actual practice.

Finally, the following should be noted regarding the affective/conative outcomes and behavioral indicators:

• There is a progression from knowledge of self to knowledge of other communities and cultures to active participation in global communities.

• The affective stage of self-awareness, while paired with the knowledge level of cognitive outcomes, becomes a fulcrum for the ability to “consider others’ points of view” (a component of practice in the conceptual model) and is the origin of empathy, the ability to view the world from other perspectives.

• The conative stage of willingness denotes a motivated state of action based on emerging cognitive abilities to differentiate alternative environments at a deeper cognitive level.

• Study abroad in the willingness stage is the first participatory action but is placed in this stage because students tend to act more as observers on a first study-abroad experience rather than agents of change in the self-other relationship.

• The stage of practice denotes behavioral impact by students based on primary and secondary internalization of self as global citizen. The idea of primary and secondary internalization is tied to the research of Ray Rist (1970) who, in his studies of the Pygmalion Effect, posited primary internalization as the individual’s realization that they are perceived by others and labeled in a way contrary to self-identity. Secondary internalization is the process by which the person comes to accept this change of state in self and behave accordingly. This process can be a key component of self-transformation during the educational experience. In the case of the Global Citizens Project, it is the final move from perception of self as emerging global citizen to acceptance of self as a competent global citizen willing to engage in behaviors appropriate to the global citizen.


68


In summary, USF has developed a set of learning outcomes across the key components of student development, which provide the parameters for the Global Citizens Project. The final step in the overall assessment process is to select and develop assessment methods and applications.

II. How to Measure

As part of the QEP budget, funding has been granted to employ an assessment specialist dedicated to the Global Citizens Project. This specialist will work closely with the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review since the overall responsibility for university assessment resides with that office. Furthermore, while we have selected initial instruments to apply to the project, much of what occurs initially will be exploratory in nature. That said, the assessment process regarding instrumentation for the Global Citizens Project will follow the same parameters set for the entire university.

Assessment with no developmental context is considered irrelevant by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review. The following fundamental tenets provide the philosophical underpinnings for assessment of the Global Citizens Project:

• Learning is cumulative and discontinuous during the undergraduate years.

• Because of the cumulative and discontinuous nature of learning, the most valid approach to assessment is “value-added” assessment. While a mastery approach is valid in some instances, the inconsistent pace at which USF undergraduate students will move through the Global Citizens Project render the isolation of mastery targets problematic at best. Value-added assessment, where possible, is the best means to capture the changes in learning for all students.

• While indirect measures of learning are valuable in gaining triangulation of self-perceived as well as measurable changes in learning, they are not viable as the sole means of assessing competencies.

• Least squares statistical methods are themselves inconsistent measures of “true” changes in learning. Therefore, where possible, multiple direct measures as well as indirect measures should be used to triangulate changes in learning over time.

• All measures must be examined for their psychometric properties before results are examined and accepted as reliable and valid. A variety of methods should be used for this purpose to assure the viability of instruments and methods. These should include but are not limited to the following:

o Tests of assumptions should be examined before using parametric techniques (these include additivity, linearity, and homoscedasticity).

o Where these assumptions are violated, alternate forms, transformations, or use of non-parametric techniques should be utilized. For example, when examining Likert-type scale data (such as scores inherent in rubrics), principle-axis analysis (an alternate form of factor analysis), or factor analysis based on polychoric correlations are the preferred data reduction techniques for evaluating construct validity. Furthermore, factor analytic techniques should only be used following appropriate test of sampling and sphericity, e.g., Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity.



69

o While a debate rages regarding the best method for such analysis, using non-duplicative variance in the diagonal of the correlation matrix makes intuitive sense with highly inter-correlated variables such as those based on rubrics.

o Efforts must be made to calculate as many types of reliability and validity coefficients as possible.

• Sampling: A stratified purposeful sampling procedure will be applied to the assessment of dimensions of the Global Citizens Project. This method allows a focus on specific student subgroups and facilitates comparisons between the different student groups. Rubric-based assessments will be conducted and standardized tests administered in courses approved for specific general education dimensions during the regularly scheduled class periods.

The conceptual model of the Global Citizens Project is sufficiently complex to warrant a variety of direct and indirect measures. Part of the challenge in assessing the model will be locating and/or developing instruments, testing their application to the model, jettisoning those that do not provide appropriate psychometric characteristics, potentially modifying those that do, and finding others where necessary in an efficient and timely manner. Initial plans for each area of the conceptual model are described below:

Affective/Conative Domain• Self-Awareness

o The Hett Global-mindedness Scale (Hett, 1993) will continue to be used as an initial discriminator for global-mindedness. Local validation found that the scale did not possess the reported subscales (principal axis analysis found a singular factor structure). However, the total scores on the test were found useful in discriminating students who had a propensity for global education from those who did not. We will continue to use this instrument even as we adopt or design others.

o The Erwin Scale of Intellectual Development (based on Perry’s Model) will be used to measure a continuum from “dualism” to “empathy” as a measure of other perspective taking. Both instruments have demonstrated reliability and validity in context.

• Willingnesso The Global Perspective Inventory (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Engberg, 2014) will be used as

a transition measure to Practice as well as the cognitive domain. The technical manual reports sound psychometrics and its subscales for “Intrapersonal Identity,” “Intrapersonal Affect,” “Social Responsibility,” “Social Interaction,” “Cognitive Knowing,” and “Cognitive Knowledge.” This reported structure will be locally validated.

o The GPI for Study Abroad: Study abroad provides an initial foray for most undergraduates into an unfamiliar environment. The GPI offers a version specifically for students returning from study abroad.

o Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale: Efficacy scales are simple to construct, easy to validate, and contextual in nature. As a pre-post measure, this is an effective way to determine changes in students’ ability to handle new and unfamiliar environments efficaciously.


70


• Practiceo Selected Activities Leading to the Global Citizens Award: The only accurate measure of student

participatory behavior is to evaluate the behavior in-situ. As part of the Global Citizen Award, a capstone project requiring participation in a constructed Global Citizens activity will be evaluated by a team of evaluators. A rubric for evaluation calibrated and tested for inter-rater reliability and internal consistency will be used to measure success in the activity.

Cognitive Domain• Knowledge

o Global Awareness Profile (Corbitt, 1998): The GAPtest is a 126-item, direct, power test of “knowledge of the world” as a measure of global awareness. Items are designed to test knowledge of “Geography and Context” across six world regions and a “global” category. The test also includes subcategories for such areas as “Environment, Culture, Politics, Religion, and Socio-Economic.” The instrument was validated by St. Joseph’s University and by an independent research firm. However, it must be locally validated. Furthermore, it is a test of factual knowledge, and there is no evidence that analytic- or synthetic-thinking items have been constructed.

o Course-embedded Rubrics: Since courses approved for the Global Citizens Project will be spread across the curriculum, contextually based, analytically scored rubrics will be designed, calibrated, and validated by the faculty in the curricular areas. These rubrics will also be cross-validated with the GAPtest.

• Analysiso Global Analysis Test: Using the GAPtest as a model, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness,

Academic Planning and Review in conjunction with the GCP assessment specialist and Global Citizens faculty will develop analytic-thinking items as an additional power test of analysis in a global context. These items will undergo rigorous psychometric validation and used in addition to the GAPtest.

o Course-embedded Rubrics: As with “Knowledge,” contextually based, analytically scored rubrics will be designed, calibrated, validated, and cross-validated with the Global Analysis Test.

• Synthesiso Global Synthesis Test: Similar to “Analysis” above, items designed to test synthetic thinking in a

global context will be designed and validated.

o Course-embedded Rubrics: Again, contextually based, analytically scored rubrics will be designed, calibrated, validated, and cross-validated with the Global Synthesis Test.

• Practice and the Cognitive Domain

o As in the affective/conative domain, there will be an opportunity to evaluate students as part of a capstone experience in the Global Citizens Project. This provides an in-situ opportunity to evaluate students’ cognitive competence as part of a final project. The generalized rubric similar to the one developed in “Practice” above will also be designed as an opportunity to evaluate the cognitive skills developed during participation in the Global Citizens Project.



71



71

III. Lessons Learned

The program of assessment described above is ambitious but attainable. Thanks to three years of cohorts undergoing a global course sequence, the administrators and faculty involved in the Global Citizens Project are not starting from scratch. Lessons have been learned from previous successes and failures. We have found that indirect measures can be sufficiently sensitive to differences in student understanding and awareness of globally contextual information as well as their self-awareness of global issues. We have also learned that holistically scored rubrics, even when demonstrating psychometrically sound properties, are inadequate in demonstrating sensitive differences in student competencies. This has also provided the experience of developing and calibrating rubrics for the future as we move to more contextual, analytically scored rubrics. Finally, we have a unique opportunity to validate a theoretically sound and methodologically robust conceptual model of Global Citizenship. Once complete, the Global Citizens Project will enable other academic and non-academic institutions the means and methods for developing global citizens capable of competently engaging in and overcoming the vicissitudes of a shrinking globe.

B. GCP Program EvaluationProgram quality is defined as meeting or exceeding pre-determined standards for each quality indicator. Formative evaluation methods and adherence to the feedback loops specified in the GCP Program Evaluation Plan will assure continuous quality improvement throughout this project. For example, data obtained in year one of the project will be used to revise, improve, or further develop courses and other project activities in year two. Special attention will be paid to student and faculty evaluation of the students’ achievement of competencies.

The Global Citizens Project will use existing internal processes and procedures for program review as a means of formative program evaluation. Procedures include the submission of a self-study report that documents student learning (including assessment plans), student profiles, and program objectives to the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review. In addition to the assessment plan outlined above, progress on performance metrics related to program objectives will be tracked (Table 12). All data collected will be analyzed by the GCP Assessment specialist and reported to the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review. Initial targets are established based on projected enrollments, funding availability, and university performance goals in strategic areas (e.g., study abroad, service learning, and undergraduate research).

Strengths and weaknesses of the project will be analyzed and reported in the end-of-year report and serve as a basis for continuous quality improvement methods to make revisions that serve to strengthen the program. Various qualitative and quantitative methods will be used to obtain data, including individual interviews; focus groups; meeting minutes; consultant reports; surveys; and questionnaires. Data will be collected from students, faculty, university administration, and other collaborators to implement this project. Feedback loops for each objective specify the individuals and/or groups who receive data and make evaluative decisions. All data associated with this project will be shared with the GCP Advisory Board and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review, who hold ultimate accountability for assuring data are used for the improvement of the project.


72


72


TABLE 12. GCP PERFORMANCE METRICS

Global Citizens Project Program

Goals

Global Citizens Project Program Objectives Performance Metrics

Pilot Targets

2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

Goal 1: The GCP will provide students with an introduction to global competencies through the FKL Core Curriculum

Objective 1.1: Infuse the GCP learning outcomes into key areas of general education.

FKL courses certified as GCP (% of FKL course total - 157 courses)

1.3% 19% 32% 42% 48% 51%

Enrollment in FKL courses certified as GCP (% of FKL enrollment - 91,250 students)

1.2% 17% 30% 38% 44% 47%

Objective 1.2: Infuse the GCP learning outcomes into the Capstone Learning Experience.

FKL capstone courses certified as GCP (% of FKL capstone total - 109 courses) 1.8% 11% 20% 29% 39% 48%

Enrollment in FKL capstone certified as GCP (% of FKL capstone enrollment - 19,000 students)

1.7% 11% 20% 29% 38% 48%

Goal 2: The GCP will provide students with opportunities to practice and apply global competencies through degree programs.

Objective 2.1: Infuse the GCP learning outcomes into required courses of degree programs.

Degree programs with Global Pathways (% of degree program total - 100 programs) 2.0% 7% 17% 27% 37% 47%

Required courses certified as GCP 2 10 20 30 40 50

Objective 2.2: Identity and/or develop global co-curricular experiences within degree programs.

Study abroad programs certified as GCP (% of USF-sponsored study abroad program total - 38 programs)

- 5% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Service learning courses certified as GCP ( % of service learning course total - 188 courses)

- 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Research-designated courses certified as GCP (% of research course total - 577 courses)

- 2% 5% 10% 20% 30%

Goal 3: The GCP will provide students with opportunities to reinforce global competencies through a Global Citizen Awards program.

Objective 3.1: Infuse the GCP learning outcomes into a broad array of non-general education courses.

Global Citizen Awards earned - 20 50 100 200 300

Global Citizen Scholar Awards earned - 2 20 50 75 100

Non-general education courses certified as GCP 2 20 40 60 80 100

Objective 3.2: Identify and/or develop a variety of global co-curricular experiences across the university.

GCP enrollment in study abroad (% of study abroad enrollment total - 1000 students)

- 2% 5% 7% 15% 20%

GCP enrollment in service learning courses (% of service learning total - 4,000 students)

- 2% 5% 7% 15% 20%

GCP enrollment in research with faculty (% of research total - 2,750 students)

- 2% 5% 7% 15% 20%



73

REFERENCES


73

REFERENCES

American Council on Education (ACE) Center for Internationalization and Global Engagement Blue Ribbon Panel on Global Engagement. (2011). Strength through global leadership and engagement: U. S. higher education in the 21st Century. Retrieved from American Council on Education website: http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/2011-CIGE-BRPReport.pdf

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Board of Directors. (2014, September). Position Statement: Reaching Global competence. Retrieved from: http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/GlobalCompetencePositionStatement0814.pdf

Appalachian State University (2013). Global learning: A world of opportunities for Appalachian students (A Quality Enhancement Plan Topic Proposal). Retrieved from http://qep.appstate.edu/sites/qep.appstate.edu/files/QEP-Global-Learning-Proposal-Final.pdf

Ashwill, M. (2004). Developing intercultural competence for the masses. International Educator, 13(2), 16-25.

Association of American Colleges & Universities. (2007). College learning for the new global century (Report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America’s Promise). Washington, DC.

Association of American Colleges & Universities. Global Learning Rubric Development Team. (2014). VALUE: Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/global-learning

Bennett, J. M. (2008). Transformative training: Designing programs for culture learning. In M. A. Moodian, (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural competences: Exploring the cross-cultural dynamics within organizations (pp. 95-110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 1: The cognitive domain. New York, NY: McKay.

Boix Mansilla, V., & Jackson, A. (2011). Educating for global competence: Preparing our youth to engage the world. Retrieved from Asia Society website: http://asiasociety.org/files/book-globalcompetence.pdf

Bok, D. (2006) Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Braskamp, L. A., Braskamp, D. C., & Engberg, M. E. (2014). Global Perspective Inventory: Its purpose, construction, potential uses, and psychometric characteristics. Retrieved from the Global Perspective Institute website: https://gpi.central.edu/supportDocs/manual.pdf

Braskamp, L. A., & Engberg, M. E. (2011). How colleges can influence the development of a global perspective. Liberal Education, 97(3-4), 34-39.

Bresciani, M. L. (2008). Global competencies in student affairs/services professionals: A literature synthesis. College Student Journal, 42(3), 906-919.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Chickering, A., & Braskamp, L. A. (2009). Developing a global perspective for personal and social responsibility. Peer Review, 11(4), 27–30.

Clyne, F., Marginson, S., & Woock, R. (2000, March). International education in Australian universities: Concepts and definitions. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, San Antonio, TX. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED453098.pdf

Corbitt, J. N. (1998). Global Awareness Profile: GAPtest facilitator’s manual. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Cuevas, N., Matveev, A., & Zapater, E. (2010). Curriculum, Mapping: A Methodology to Define, Document, Demonstrate, and Improve

the Coherence of Program Curricula. Workshop presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Louisville, KY

Deardorff, D. K. (2004). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of international education at institutions of higher education in the United States (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3128751)

Deardorff, D.K. (2006). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization at institutions of higher education in the United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241-266. doi: 10.1177/1028315306287002

Deardorff, D.K. (2009). Understanding the challenges of assessing global citizenship. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship. New York, NY: Routledge Press and the American Association of Colleges and Universities.



74

Deardorff, D. K. (2011). Assessing intercultural competence. New Directions for Institutional Research, 149, 65- 79. doi: 10.1002/ir

Deardorff, D. K., & Hunter, W. (2006). Educating global-ready graduates. International Educator, 15(3), 72-83.Duke University. (2009). Global Duke: Enhancing Students’ Capacity for World Citizenship. Retrieved from http://globalqep.uncg.edu/

forms/GlobalEngagement/Duke%20University%20QEP_final_version_Global.pdf

Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, p. 665-697. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.665

Engberg, M. E. (2013). The influence of study away experiences on global-perspective taking. Journal of College Student Development, 54(5), 466-480. doi:10.1353/csd.2013.0073

Florida International University (2010). Global Learning for Global Citizenship. Miami, FL

Gilligan, C. (1982). In A Different Voice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Glass, C. R., Buus, S., & Braskamp, L. A. (2013). Uneven experiences: What’s missing and what matters for today’s international students. Retrieved from Global Perspective Institute website: https://gpi.central.edu/supportDocs/Report-on-International-Students.pdf

Green, M. (2013, April). Acting as global citizens: A challenge to U.S. colleges and universities [Trends & Insights for International Education Leaders]. Retrieved from NAFSA: Association for International Educators website: http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/ti_global_citizens.pdf

Hendershot, K. (2010). Transformative learning and global citizen identity development in undergraduates: A case study (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3389956)

Hett, E. J. (1993). The development of an instrument to measure global-mindedness (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 9408210)

Hovland, K. (2014a). Global learning: defining, designing, demonstrating. Retrieved from NAFSA: Association of International Educators website: http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/downloads/global_learning.pdf

Hovland, K. (2014b). What can global learners do? Diversity & Democracy, 17(2), 8-11.

Hudzik, J. K., & McCarthy, J. S. (2012). Leading comprehensive internationalization: Strategy and tactics for action. Retrieved from NAFSA: Association of International Educators website: www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/Chez_NAFSA/Resource_Library_Assets/Publications_Library/Leading%20CIZN.pdf

Hunter, B., White, G. P., & Godbey, G. C. (2006). What does it mean to be globally competent? Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 267-285. doi: 10.1177/1028315306286930

Hunter, W. D. (2004). Knowledge, skills, attitudes, and experiences necessary to become globally competent (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3147319)

Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research and social issues (p. 31-53). New York, NY: Holt.

Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007). Globalisation and higher education (OECD Education Working Papers No. 8). doi: 10.1787/173831738240

Musil, C. M. (2006). Assessing global learning: Matching good intentions with good practice. Retrieved from http://archive.aacu.org/SharedFutures/documents/Global_Learning.pdf

Noddings, N. (1999). Care, justice, and equity. Justice and caring: The search for common ground in education, 1, 7-20.

O’Loughlin, E., & Wegimont, L. (Eds.) (2002). Global education in Europe to 2015: Strategies, policies, and perspectives (Outcomes and Papers of the Europe-wide Global Education Congress). Retrieved from Council of Europe website: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/nscentre/Resources/Publications/GE_Maastricht_Nov2002.pdf

Olson, C. L., Green, M. F., & Hill, B. A. (2006). A handbook for advancing comprehensive internationalization: What institutions can do and what students should learn. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Perry, L.B., & Southwell, L. (2011). Developing intercultural understanding and skills: models and approaches. Intercultural Education, 22(6), 453-466. doi: 10.1080/14675986.2011.644948

Perry, W. G., Jr. (1968). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.


75

REFERENCES

Redden, E. (2010, July 13). Academic outcomes of study abroad. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/07/13/abroad

Redman, M.L. (2014). Reaching global competence: Our profession, our students’ future [President’s Message]. Foreign Language Annals, 47(4), 571-572. doi: 10.1111/flan.12116

Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Psychology, 48(5), 858-870. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2012.701749

RiCharde, S., Moore, M., & Wao, F. (2010). Assessing general education: Fifth year report on the Quality Enhancement Plan and general education. Retrieved from University of South Florida Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment http://www.usf.edu/provost/documents/assessment/2010-assessmentreport-generaleducation.pdf

Rist, R. C. (1970). Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education. Harvard Educational Review 40(3), 411-451.

Rudisille, J., Sans, L., Thiebe, G., Slater, L., Eaton, M., & Swanson, R. (2011). Engaging global citizens outside the classroom: A resource guide for campus professionals. Retrieved from Association of College Unions International website: http://www.acui.org/exchange/index.aspx?itemId=19280

Schattle, H. (2008). The practices of global citizenship. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Scott, P. (2000). Globalisation of higher education: Challenges for the 21st century. Journal of Studies in International Education, 4(1), 3-10. doi: 10.1177/102831530000400102

Singh, N., & Papa, R. (2010). The impacts of globalization in higher education. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 5(2), 1-9.

Sobania, N., & Braskamp, L.A. (2009). Study abroad or study away: It’s not merely semantics. Peer Review, 11(4), 23-26.

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. (2012). Resource manual for the principles of accreditation: Foundations for quality enhancement (2nd ed.). Retrieved from SACSCOC: http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/Resource%20Manual.pdf

Stanley Foundation & American Council on International Intercultural Education. (1997). Educating for the global community: A framework for community colleges. Retrieved from The Stanley Foundation website: http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/publications/archive/CC2.pdf

Steger, M. B. (2009). Globalization: A very short introduction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Sutton, S. B. (2013, Fall). The growing world of collaborative internationalization: Taking partnerships to the next level. IIE Networker, p. 40-41.Retrieved from http://www.naylornetwork.com/iie-nxt/index.asp

University of Florida. (2014). Learning Without Borders: Internationalizing the Gator Nation. Retrieved from http://qep.aa.ufl.edu/Data/Sites/23/media/qep/1-21-14-final-qep-with-cover-for-the-web-rev2.pdf

University of South Florida (USF). (2005). Inspire: Infusing and nurturing the skills and practice of inquiry and research in education (The USF Quality Enhancement Plan). Retrieved from http://www.acad.usf.edu/Office/IE/Resources/QEP.pdf

University of South Florida (USF). (2009). The philosophy of a university education. Retrieved from http://www.ugs.usf.edu/gened/university%20education%20final.pdf

University of South Florida (USF). (2013). 2013-2018 Strategic Plan: A global research university dedicated to student success. Retrieved from http://www.ods.usf.edu/Plans/Strategic/docs/USF-Strategic-Plan-2013-2018.pdf

University of South Florida System (USF System). (2013-2014). USF System Facts. Retrieved from http://www.usf.edu/provost/documents/reports-provost/fact-book-2013-14.pdf

University of South Florida World, Education Abroad Office (USF World). (2013-2014). Annual Report. Retrieved from http://educationabroad.global.usf.edu

University of Texas at Tyler (2010). GATE: Global Awareness Through Education. Tyler, TX.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

West, C. (2012). Toward globally competent pedagogy. Retrieved from NAFSA: Association of International Educators website: http://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/Chez_NAFSA/Find_Resources/Publications/Periodicals/Epublications/epub_toward_globally.pdf

Winthrop University. (2011). Winthrop University Quality Enhancement Plan: The Global Learning Initiative. Retrieved from: http://www2.winthrop.edu/gli/wuPublicGli.pdf



76

APPENDICES


76

APPENDICES


76

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A1: QEP STEERING COMMITTEE

APPENDIX A: QEP PARTICIPANTS

Name Title and Department Representative Unit

Elizabeth Aranda Associate Professor and Chair, Sociology College of Arts and Sciences

Diane Austin Associate Director and Senior Instructor, School of Information College of Arts and Sciences

Abdool Aziz (2014-2015) Senate President Pro-Tempore Student Government

Catherine BeneteauAssociate Professor,

Mathematics & Statistics College of Arts and Sciences

Mya BreitbartAssociate Professor,

Biological OceanographyCollege of Marine Science

Roger BrindleyVice Provost and USF System Associate Vice President for Global Engagement USF World

Lisa BrownAssociate Professor,

School of Aging StudiesCollege of Behavioral and

Community SciencesKarla Davis-Salazar Associate Dean Undergraduate Studies

Don DellowAssociate Professor, Adult, Career,

and Higher Education College of Education

Tim Dixon Professor, Geology College of Arts and SciencesMichael Freeman Dean of Students Student AffairsBeth Garland Chief Business Officer, Innovative Education Innovative Education

Holly Gerardi (2014-2015)Graduate Student, Government

and International Affairs College of Arts and Sciences

Fanni Green Professor, Theatre and Dance College of the Arts

Brandon Hartmann (2014-2015) Chairman of University, Community, and Government Affairs Student Government

Kris-An Hinds (2013-2014) Undergraduate Student, International Studies College of Arts and Sciences

Jessica Lauther (2014-2015) Alumna, Communication College of Arts and SciencesJohn Lennon Assistant Professor, English College of Arts and SciencesPhil Levy Associate Professor, History College of Arts and SciencesDavid Lewis Assistant Professor, Integrative Biology College of Arts and SciencesAutumn Mueller Director of Advising College of Arts and SciencesJackie Nelson Senior Director of Undergraduate Affairs Muma College of BusinessKay Perrin Assistant Dean, Undergraduate Studies College of Public Health

Steve RiCharde Associate Vice President, SACSCOC Liaison Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning & Review

Stephan Schindler Department Chair, World Languages College of Arts and SciencesNick Setteducato Executive Director, Business and Finance Office of the ProvostDrew Smith Assistant Librarian, Academic Services USF Tampa Library

Scott Solomon Associate Professor, Government and International Affairs College of Arts and Sciences

Bob Sullins Dean Undergraduate Studies

Greg TeagueAssociate Professor, Mental Health

Law and PolicyCollege of Behavioral and

Community Sciences

Maya Trotz (2013-2014)Associate Professor, Civil

and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering

Raven Villegas (2013-2014) Alumna, International Studies and Political Science College of Arts and Sciences

Connie VisovskyAssociate Dean, Student Affairs and Community Engagement College of Nursing

Jack West (2013-2014) Undergraduate Student, Environmental Science and Policy College of Arts and Sciences

Shannon Wilde (2013-2014) Graduate Student, Management/International Business Muma College of Business



77

Name Department College

Manish Agrawal Informational Systems/Decision Sciences Muma College of Business

Fenda Akiwumi School of Geosciences College of Arts and Sciences

Patricia Anzalone Industrial and Management Systems Engineering College of Engineering

John Belohlavek History College of Arts and Sciences

Philip Bishop Philosophy Honors College

Mike Bowen Management Muma College of Business

Kelli Burns Mass Communications College of Arts and Sciences

Jaime Corvin Department of Global Health College of Public Health

Kiersten Cox Library and Information Sciences College of Arts and Sciences

Robin Ersing School of Public Affairs College of Arts and Sciences

Michael Foley School of Theatre and Dance College of the Arts

Michael Gibbons Government and International Affairs College of Arts and Sciences

Grandon Gill Informational Systems/Decision Sciences Muma College of Business

Marty Gould English College of Arts and Sciences

Laurel Graham Sociology College of Arts and Sciences

Sara Green Sociology College of Arts and Sciences

Carl Herndl English College of Arts and Sciences

Elizabeth Hordge- Freeman Sociology College of Arts and Sciences

Kevin Jones Assistant Director for Assessment Institutional Effectiveness

Ippokratis Kantzios World Languages College of Arts and Sciences

Marc Lajeunesse Integrative Biology College of Arts and Sciences

Jeannette Mena Marketing Muma College of Business

Chad Michaels Management Muma College of Business

Mozella Mitchell Religious Studies College of Arts and Sciences

Wilfrido Moreno Electrical Engineering College of Engineering

Jane Noll Psychology College of Arts and Sciences

Adriana Novoa History College of Arts and Sciences

Chris Probes World Languages College of Arts and Sciences

Paul Reller School of Music College of the Arts

Jason Rohr Integrative Biology College of Arts and Sciences

David Rubin Women’s Studies College of Arts and Sciences

Heike Scharm World Languages College of Arts and Sciences

Barbara Shircliffe Psychological and Social Foundations College of Education

Kersuze Simeon-Jones World Languages and Africana Studies College of Arts and Sciences

Elizabeth Strom School of Public Affairs College of Arts and Sciences

Ryan Toomey Chemical and Biomedical Engineering College of Engineering

Jessie Turner Women’s and Gender Studies College of Arts and Sciences

Elizabeth Vaquera Sociology College of Arts and Sciences

Beth Walton School of Geosciences College of Arts and Sciences

Daniel Yeh Civil and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering

Carlos Zalaquett Psychological and Social Foundations College of Education

Tamara Zwick History College of Arts and Sciences

APPENDIX A2: FACULTY FOCUS GROUPS ON LEARNING OUTCOMES


78

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A3: QEP CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT TEAM


Dan Belgrad Chair, Humanities and Cultural Studies General Education Council

Rachel Canning Secretary of Student Life Student Government

Daniel Cruz Instructor, Department of Chemistry College of Arts and Sciences

Karla Davis-Salazar Associate Dean Undergraduate Studies

Michael Foley Associate Professor, Dance College of the Arts

Kevin Jones Assistant Director for Assessment Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review

Janet Moore Associate Dean Undergraduate Studies

Jianping Qi Professor, Finance Muma College of Business

Scott Sandoval Student Body Vice President Student Government

Stephan Schindler Chair, World Languages General Education Council

Mark Stewart Professor, Geosciences College of Arts and Sciences

Kevin Yee Director Academy for Teaching and Learning Excellence

Daniel Yeh Associate Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering

APPENDIX A4: QEP CO-CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT TEAM


Larry Braue Director Veterans Services

Rachel Canning Secretary of Student Life Student Government


Marnie Hauser Director Office of Orientation

Kevin Jones Assistant Director for Assessment Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review

Linda Kasper Director Residential Life and Education

Jean Keelan Career Counselor Career Services

Reggie Lucien Academic Advisor Honors College

Danielle McDonald Associate Dean for Students Student Affairs

Keri Riegler Director New Student Connections

Aziz Talbani Director Office of Multicultural Affairs

Todd Wells Director Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement



79

APPENDIX A5: ACADEMIC ADVISOR FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS


Angela Casey Academic Advisor, Undergraduate Programs Muma College of Business

Shani Garza Academic Advisor, English College of Arts and Sciences

Atiya Jackson Academic Advisor, Math College of Arts and Sciences

Kate Johnson Assistant Director, Student Services College of Engineering

Deborah Major Academic Advisor Center for Academic Advising

Jamie McGaha Academic Advisor, Education College of Education

Urvick St. Jean Academic Advisor, Psychology College of Arts and Sciences

Kara Steinman Academic Advisor, Architecture College of Architecture

Annette Strzelecki Academic Advisor, Public Health College of Public Health

Caroline Twachtman Academic Advisor, Honors Honors College


Catherine Batsche Associate Dean College of Behavioral and Community Sciences

Daniel Cruz Instructor, Chemistry College of Arts and Sciences


Kevin Jones Assistant Director of Assessment Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Academic Planning and Review

Steven Reader Acting Chair, School of Geosciences College of Arts and Sciences

Kevin Yee Director Academy for Teaching and Learning Excellence

APPENDIX A6: AAC&U INSTITUTE ON GENERAL EDUCATION AND ASSESSMENT TEAM


Maryellen Allen Assistant Director for Instructional Services USF Library

Ross Andel Associate Professor, School of Aging Studies

College of Behavioral and Community Sciences

Abdool Aziz Senate President Pro-Tempore Student Government

Jeff Cunningham Associate Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering

Pat Jones Associate Professor, Teaching and Learning College of Education


Autumn Mueller Director of Advising College of Arts and Sciences

Scott Rimbey Senior Instructor, Mathematics College of Arts and Sciences

APPENDIX A7: GLOBAL FKL IMPLEMENTATION TEAM


80

APPENDICES


James Cavendish Chair, Religious Studies, School of Humanities College of Arts and Sciences


Danielle Dennis Associate Professor, Literacy Studies College of Education

Betty Jordan Senior Assistant Dean, Undergraduate Programs College of Nursing

Danielle McDonald Associate Dean for Students Student Affairs

Janet Moore Associate Dean Undergraduate Studies

Jackie Nelson Senior Director, Undergraduate Affairs Muma College of Business

Kay Perrin Assistant Dean, Undergraduate Studies College of Public Health

Tom Pluckhahn Associate Chair, Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences

Steven Reader Associate Chair, School of Geosciences College of Arts and Sciences

Sidney Resmondo Director, University Affairs Student Government

Rene Sanchez Assistant Director Education Abroad

Bea Smith Director, Academic and Student Services College of Behavioral and Community Sciences

Anthony White Program Director Housing and Residential Education

Wally Wilson Director, Art and Art History College of the Arts

APPENDIX A8: GLOBAL PATHWAYS IMPLEMENTATION TEAM

APPENDIX A9: GLOBAL CITIZEN AWARDS IMPLEMENTATION TEAM


Lance Arney Associate Director Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships

Cynthia Brown-Hernandez Assistant Director, Academic Services Undergraduate Studies


Angela Debose University Registrar Office of the Registrar

Holly Gerardi Doctoral Graduate Assistant Undergraduate Studies

Judelande Jeune Assistant Director, University Affairs Student Government

Jean Keelan Career Counselor Career Services

Jessica Lauther Administrative Specialist Undergraduate Studies

Monica Miranda Director Center for Student Involvement

Kali Morgan Doctoral Graduate Assistant Undergraduate Studies

Rick Pollenz Director Office for Undergraduate Research

Rene Sanchez Assistant Director Education Abroad

Brianne Stanback Chair Undergraduate Council

Caroline Twachtman Academic Advisor Honors College

Todd Wells Director Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement



81

Term Definition References

Internationalization

“… reflects a world-order dominated by nation states…deeply influenced by the retreat from Empire, the persistence (of) neo-colonialism, and by the geopolitics of Great Power rivalry—most notably the Cold War”

Scott, P. (2000, p. 4).

“… any relationship across borders between nations, or between single institutions situated within different national systems”

Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007, p. 11).

Globalization

“… reflects not only the processes of global competitiveness between, for example, the great market blocs of the United States, the European Union and the Pacific Rim nations, but it also involves intensified collaboration, as a global division of labour has developed… (and) can address new agendas – of global climate change, worldwide pollution, sustainable technologies and…the inequalities between North and South and those within nations.”

Scott, P. (2000, p. 4).

“…the processes of world-wide engagement and convergence associated with the growing role of global systems that criss-cross many national borders”

Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007, p. 11).

Comprehensive internationalization

“…a commitment, confirmed through action, to infuse international and comparative perspectives throughout the teaching, research, and service missions of higher education”

Hudzik, J. K., & McCarthy, J. S. (2012, n.p.).

Global learning

“Knowledge of human cultures and the physical and natural world…focused by engagement with big questions; intellectual and practical skills…practiced across the curriculum; personal and social responsibility…anchored through active involvement with diverse communities and real-world challenges; (and) integrative and applied learning…demonstrated in new settings and in the context of complex problems”

Hovland, K. (2014b, p. 5).

“… a critical analysis of and an engagement with complex, interdependent global systems and legacies (such as natural, physical, social, cultural, economic, and political) and their implications for people’s lives and the earth’s sustainability”

AAC&U Global Learning Rubric Development Team (2014)

“the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students acquire through a variety of experiences that enable them to understand world cultures and events; analyze global systems; appreciate cultural difference; and apply this knowledge and appreciation to their lives as citizens and workers”

Olson, C. L., Green, M. F., & Hill, B. A. (2006, p. v).

Global awareness“…knowledge of the world and one’s interconnectedness with others”

Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013, p. 859-860).

APPENDIX B. EXPERTS’ STATEMENTS REGARDING GLOBAL CONCEPTS


82

APPENDICES

Term Definition References

Global competence

“…having an open mind while actively seeking to understand cultural norms and expectations of others, leveraging this gained knowledge to interact, communicate and work effectively outside one’s environment”

Hunter, W. D. (2004, p. 1).

“… a developed appreciation of other cultures and the ability to interact with people from foreign lands. The ability to become familiar with an environment, not causing a rift while experiencing something new, and reflection upon the experience at its completion”

Curran (2003), as cited in Hunter, W. D. (2004, p. 11).

“… exists when a learner is able to understand the interconnectedness of peoples and systems, to have a general knowledge of history and world events, to accept and cope with the existence of different cultural values and attitudes and, indeed, to celebrate the richness and benefits of diversity.”

Stanley Foundation & American Council on International Intercultural Education. (1997, p. 4).

Global education“…opens people’s eyes to the realities of the globalized world and awakens them to bring about a world of greater justice, equity, and Human Rights for all”

O’Loughlin, E., & Wegimont, L. (Eds.) (2002, p. 13).

Global citizenship“…awareness, caring, and embracing cultural diversity while promoting social justice and sustainability, coupled with a sense of responsibility to act”

Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013, p. 860).

Intercultural competence

“…involves the ability to interact effectively and appropriately with people from other cultures. Interaction is commonly taken to include both behaviour and communication. Intercultural competence is generally related to four dimensions: knowledge, attitudes, skills and behaviours.”

Perry, L.B., & Southwell, L. (2011, p. 455).

“… a set of cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills and characteristics that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts.”

Bennett, J. M. (2008, p. 97).

“…the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitude.”

Deardorff, D. K. (2004, p. 184).

“Knowledge of others; knowledge of self; skills to interpret and relate; skills to discover and/or to interact; valuing others’ values, beliefs, and behaviors; and relativizing one’s self. Linguistic competence plays a key role.”

Byram, M. (1997), as cited in Deardorff, D. K., (2006, p. 247).

“Five components: World knowledge, foreign language proficiency, cultural empathy, approval of foreign people and cultures, ability to practice one’s profession in an international setting”

Lambert, R. D. (Ed.). (1994), as cited in Deardorff, D. K. (2006, p. 247).



83

Communication Mathematics Natural Science Social/Behavioral

ENC 1101 English Comp 1 MAC 2105 College Algebra AST 2002 Descriptive Astronomy PSY 2012 Intro to PsychologyMAC 2311 Calculus I BSC 2005 General Biology SYG 2000 Principles of SociologyMGF 2106 Liberal Arts Mathematics I BSC 2010 General Biology I ANT 2000 Intro to AnthropologyMGF 2107 Liberal Arts Mathematics II BSC 2085 Anatomy and Physiology I POS 2041 American GovernmentSTA 2023 Statistical Methods CHM 2020 Chemistry for Liberal Studies AMH 2020 Introductory Survey Since 1877

CHM 2045 General Chemistry I ECO 2013 Principles of MacroeconomicsESC 2000 Introduction to Earth ScienceEVR 2001 Intro to Environmental SciencePHY 2020 Fundamentals of PhysicsPHY 2048 General Physics with CalculusPHY 2053 General Physics I

ENC 1102 Composition II MAC 1147Precalculus Algebra and Trigonometry

ANT 2511 Biological Anthropology AFA 2000 Intro to the Black Experience

MAC 2233 Business Calculus BSC 1020 The Biology of Humans AMS 3700 Racism in American Society

MAC 2241 Life Sciences Calculus I BSC 2011 Biodiversity CCJ 3014 Crime and Justice in America

MAC 2242 Life Sciences Calculus II BSC 2050 Environment CGS 2034 Computers & Impact on Society

MAC 2281 Engineering Calculus I BSC 2086 Anatomy and Physiology II for Health Professionals ECO 1000 Basic Economics

MAC 2282 Engineering Calculus II WST 3324 Women, Environment & Gender EDF 3514 History of Education in the U.S.

MAC 2313 Calculus II AST 2004 Stellar Astronomy/Cosmology EGN 3615 Engineering Economics with Social and Global Implications

CGS 2060Intro to Computers and Computer Programming

CHM 2032 Introduction to General, Organic, and Biochemistry I GEY 2000 Introduction to Gerontology

FIN 2100 Personal Finance CHM 2046 General Chemistry II GEY 3625 Sociological Aspects of Aging

PHI 2101 Intro to Formal Logic ENV 2073 Global Warming: Science and Politics of a Contemporary Issue GEY 4612 Psychology and Aging

PHI 3130 Formal Logic EVR 2002 Environmental Science: Regional and Global Issues GEY 4641 Death and Dying

PSY 3204 Psychological Statistics EVR 2217 Energy, Environment and Sustain-ability HSC 2100 Contemporary Health Science

QMB 2100Business and Economics Statistics I

GEO 2200 Introduction to Physical Geography HSC 2130 Sex, Health & Decision Making

STA 2122 Social Science Statistics GLY 2010 Dynamic Earth: Intro to Physical Geology IDH 3400 Social and Behavioral Sciences

IDH 3600 Seminar in Applied Ethics

GLY 2030 Hazards of Earth’s Surface ISS 1102 Self and Society

GLY 2073 Global Climate Change: A Geosci-ence Perspective LIS 2005 Library & Internet Research Skills

GLY 2100 History of Life MMC 3602 Mass Communication and Society

GLY 2160 Geology of the National Parks PHI 1103 Critical Thinking

IDH 3350 Natural Sciences Honors SPC 3301 Interpersonal Communication

OCE 2001 Introduction to Oceanography SYD 3700 Race and Ethnic Relations

PHI 1401 Science and Society SYG 2010 Contemporary Social Problems

PHY 2049 General Physics II - Calculus Based SYP 3000 Social Psychology

PHY 2054 General Physics II - Algebra Based WST 2600 Human Sexual Behavior

PSC 2515 Energy and Humanity WST 3015 Introduction to Women’s Studies

WST 3311 Issues in Feminism

WST 4320 Politics & Issues in Women’s Health

Total HCD 1/2 0/19 1/35 20/33Total GLC 0/2 0/19 1/35 3/33HCD & GLC 0/2 0/19 0/35 2/33Neither 1/2 19/19 33/35 8/33

APPENDIX C. GENERAL EDUCATION COURSES COLOR-CODED BY FKL DIMENSION: HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY (GOLD), GLOBAL CONTEXT (LIGHT GREEN), OR BOTH (DARK GREEN)


84

APPENDICES

Humanities Fine ArtsHuman/Cultural Diversity

in a Global Context

LIT 2000 Intro to Literature ARH 2000 Art and CulturePHI 2010 Intro to Philosophy HUM 1020 Intro to Humanities

MUL 2010 Music and Culture

THE 2000 Theatre and Culture

AFH 3100 African History to 1850 ART 2201C Concepts and Practices I AFA 2380 History and Theory of Genocide

AFH 3200 African History since 1850 ART 2203C Concepts and Practices II ANT 2464Global Health from a Social Science Perspective

AMH 2010 American History I MUC 2301 Intro to Electronic Music ANT 2410 Cultural Anthropology

AMH 3571 African American History to 1865 MUH 2020 The History of Blues and Rock ANT 3101 Archaeology

AMH 3572 African American History since 1865 MUH 2051Folk and Traditional Music of World Cultures

CGS 2094 Cyber Ethics

AMS 2030 Introduction to American Studies MUH 3016 Survey of Jazz EGN 3835 Globalization and Technology

AMS 2270 Twentieth-century American Culture MUL 3011 Western Art Music in Your Life GEA 2000 World Regional Geography

ARC 2211 Intro to Architecture THE 2252 Great Performances on Film GEO 2400 Human Geography

ARH 2050 History of Visual Arts I HUM 2273 The Cultures of East and West II

ARH 2051 History of Visual Arts II IDH 4200 Geographical Perspectives Honors

ASH 2270 Southeast Asian History LAH 2020 Latin American Civilization

CLA 3103 Greek Civilization LAS 4023 African Diaspora in Latin America and the Caribbean

CLA 3124 Roman Civilization REL 2300 Introduction to World Religions

CLT 3370 Classical Mythology REL 3131 New Religions in America

ENL 3334 Shakespeare from a Historical Perspective SPC 3710 Communication and Cultural Diversity

EUH 2011 Ancient History I

EUH 2012 Ancient History II

EUH 2022 The Medieval West

EUH 2030 Modern European History I

EUH 2031 Modern European History II

FIL 1002 Intro to Film Studies

HUM 2210 Studies in Culture: The Classical through Medieval Periods

HUM 2230 European Humanities: Renaissance-20th Century

HUM 2250 The Twentieth Century

HUM 2522 Intro to the Cultural Study of Popular Music

HUM 2594 Science in Cultural Context

IDH 2010 Acquisition of Knowledge Honors

IDH 3100 Arts & Humanities Honors

LIN 2002 Language, Culture, and Film

LIT 2010 Introduction to Fiction

LIT 2020 Intro to the Short Story

LIT 2030 Introduction to Poetry

LIT 2040 Introduction to Drama

PHI 1600 Introduction to Ethics

REL 2166 Intro to Religion & Ecology

REL 3111 Religious Quest in Contemporary Films

SPC 2608 Public Speaking

WST 2250 The Female Experience in America

WST 4522 Classics in Feminist Theory

Total HCD 14/41 2/12 3/15 41Total GLC 3/41 2/12 6/15 15HCD & GLC 0/41 0/12 6/15 8Neither 27/41 8/12 0/15 93

157



85

APPENDIX D: FKL COURSE RECERTIFICATION FORM (GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT SECTION)

Global FKL Content (optional – but encouraged - for courses in the following core areas: Communication, Mathematics/Quantitative Reasoning, and Natural Sciences)For courses certified in the core areas of Social/Behavioral Sciences (CASB), Humanities (CAHU), and Fine

Arts (CAFA), please complete the information below for EITHER Human and Cultural Diversity OR Global

Context (or both, if desired).

For courses certified in the core area of Human and Cultural Diversity in a Global Context (CAGC), please

complete the information below for BOTH Human and Cultural Diversity AND Global Context.

1. Please select which dimension(s) this course addresses.

Human and Cultural Diversity Global Context

______________________________________________________________________________

Human and Cultural Diversity2a. KNOWLEDGE: Knowledge of diverse cultures and associated ideologies, languages, histories, geographies, technologies, and

artistic/cultural expressions

In this course, students will (please select one or more): describe multiple dimensions of cultures (e.g. environmental, ideological, linguistic, communicative,

historical, geographic, technological, and/or artistic). recognize that cultural systems experience historical and geopolitical processes differently.

State the course-specific learning outcome(s) from the syllabus and in Section 2 of this form that addresses the selection(s) made above.

2b. ANALYSIS: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of cultural systems and issues across place and time

In this course, students will (please select one or more): explain the connections among dimensions of cultures. analyze cultures as complex systems shaped by relations of power and interdependence. compare how cultural systems structure basic social categories (e.g., sex, gender, sexuality, age, class,

disability, nationality, race, ethnicity, immigration status). compare the impact of historical and geopolitical processes on cultural systems.



86

APPENDICES

2c. SYNTHESIS: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex cultural issues or unfamiliar cultural situations

In this course, students will (please select one or more): synthesize different types and sources of information to assess cultural issues or situations. incorporate multiple perspectives into decision making when addressing cultural issues or situations. communicate ideas and information to diverse audiences. differentiate patterns in human behavior, beliefs, norms, perceptions, and aspirations.


______________________________________________________________________________

Global Context3a. KNOWLEDGE: Knowledge of global systems and issues and associated dimensions (e.g., historical, political, economic, social,

cultural, environmental, technological)

In this course, students will (please select one or more): identify and describe major global issues. describe multiple dimensions of global systems (e.g., historical, political, economic, ethical, social, cultural,

environmental, and/or technological). recognize that global issues and systems are experienced differently at local scales.


3b. ANALYSIS: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of global systems and issues across place and time

In this course, students will (please select one or more): explain the connections among dimensions of global systems. analyze global issues and challenges, their histories, and impacts analyze the ethical, social, and environmental challenges of global systems. compare how global issues and systems are experienced at different scales.

State the course-specific learning outcome(s) from the syllabus and in Section 2 of this form that addresses selection(s) made above.



87

3c. SYNTHESIS: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex global issues

In this course, students will (please select one or more): synthesize different types and sources of information to assess global issues. incorporate multiple perspectives (e.g., disciplinary, cultural, ethical) into decision making when addressing

global issues. consider local and/or global impacts of planned actions. weigh options/planned actions and/or formulate possible solutions.

State the course-specific learning outcome(s) from the syllabus and in Section 2 of this form that addresses the selection(s) made above.______________________________________________________________________________

4. Global Citizens Project/Assignment: Every FKL course certified for the dimensions of Human and Cultural Diversity and/or Global Context must have a problem-based assignment(s) that can be used for assessment of student learning. The assignment(s) must be labeled Global Citizens Project or Assignment in the syllabus and require students to perform the selections made above. Please describe the problem-based project/assignment for this course and explain how it addresses your selections made above. Submit assignment instructions and requirements (that will be provided to students) to [email protected].

5. Assessment Commitment: (Indicate departmental commitment to assess student learning using GCP assessment methods.)

The instructor or academic unit offering this course commits to assessing student learning using GCP assessment methods, upon request by the General Education Council.


88

APPENDICES

Writing Intensive (WRIN) Capstone (CPST) Writing Intensive OR CapstoneAML 3604 African American Literature AFA 4335 Black Women in America ENG 4674 Film & CultureAMS 3615 Film & American Society AFA 4430 Afro-Diasporic Literature in Political Movements HUM 4931 Seminar in Humanities

ANT 4241 Anthropology of Religion AMS 3605 Working Class Culture in America RUT 3111 Twentieth Century Russian Literature in English

ARH 4710 History of Photography AMS 4804 Major Ideas in AmericaATR 4504 Seminar in Sports Medicine AMS 4935 Senior Seminar in American StudiesCLT 3103 Greek Literature in Translation ANT 4302 Gender in Cross-Cultural PerspectiveCLT 3123 Roman Literature in Translation ANT 4401 Exploring Cross-Cultural DiversityDAN 4134 Ballet History CCJ 4934 Seminar in CriminologyEDE 4801 The Teacher as Researcher CEG 4850 Capstone Geotechnical/Transportation DesignEDF 3604 Schools and Society CES 4750 Capstone Structural/Geotechnical/Material Design

EEC 4008Teaching Literature and Writing in Early Childhood CIS 4250 Ethical Issues/Professional Conduct

ENC 3604 Communications for Engineers COM 4958 Communication Senior CapstoneENC 3249 Communication for IT Professionals CWR 4812 Capstone Water Resources/Environmental DesignENC 3250 Professional Writing DAN 4135 Modern Dance HistoryENC 3310 Expository Writing ECH 4615 Product and Process DesignFIL 3854 Film Art EDE 4940 Internship: Elementary Education

FRT 3001 Great French Love Stories in English Translation EEC 4936 Senior Seminar in Childhood Education

FRT 3140 French Literary Masterpieces in English Translation EEL 4914 Senior Design Project

GLY 4921 Scientific Communication EEX 4742 Narrative Perspectives on ExceptionalityIDH 5975 Honors Thesis EGN 4800 Contemporary Issues in STEM Education

LAE 4414 Teaching Literature in Elementary School, Grades K-6

LIT 3103 Great Literature of the World EIN 4891 Capstone DesignLIT 3155 Twentieth-Century Literature EML 4551 Capstone DesignLIT 3301 Cultural Studies and the Popular Arts EVR 4027 Wetland EnvironmentsLIT 3374 The Bible as Literature EVR 4114 Climate ChangeLIT 3383 The Image of Women in Literature EVT 4651 Equity in Schools and the WorkplaceLIT 3451 Literature and the Occult FLE 4936 Senior Seminar in Foreign Language

MHS 4731 Writing for Research and Publication in Behavioral and Community Sciences FRE 3500 French Civilization

MUE 4936 Senior Seminar in Music Education GEB 4890 Strategic Management and DecisionmakingMUH 4372 Representing the United States in Music GEY 4507 Understanding Policies and Practice in Long Term CareNUR 4165 Nursing Inquiry

NUR 4169C Evidence-Based Practice for Bacc-Prepared Nurses GEY 4635 Business Management in an Aging Society

PHC 4720 Foundation of Professional Writing in Public Health GEY 4547 Ethical and Legal Issues in Aging

PHI 4320 Philosophy of Mind HIS 3938 Major Issues in HistoryPHM 4331 Modern Political Philosophy HIS 4936 Special Topics in History

PSY 4974 Honors Seminar in Psychology (Second Semester) HSC 4631 Critical Issues in Public Health

REL 4499 Classics of Christian Thought HUM 4938 Major Issues in the HumanitiesREL 4931 Seminar in Religion IDS 3934 Applied Science CapstoneRUT 3110 19th Century Russian Literature in English IDH 5956 Honors ProjectSYG 3235 Latina/Latino Lives LAE 4936 Senior Seminar in English EducationSYO 4430 Disability and Society MAE 4936 Senior Seminar in Mathematics EducationSYP 4420 Consumer Culture MHS 4425 Field Experience in Behavioral HealthcareTHE 4330 Shakespeare for the Theatre MUE 4940 Internship: Music EducationTHE 4401 American Drama NUR 4634C Population Health

NUR 4636 Population-Focused NursingWST 4262 Literature by Women of color in the Diaspora PET 4088 Individualized Fitness and Wellness Programming

PET 4946 Internship in Physical Education: ElementaryPHI 4938 Capstone SeminarPSY 4932 Honors Seminar in PsychologyREL 3375 Issues in Caribbean ReligionsREL 4213 Early Jewish LiteratureSCE 4936 Senior Seminar in Science EducationSPA 4050 Introduction to the Clinical ProcessSSE 4936 Senior Seminar in Social Science EducationSYA 4935 Senior Seminar in SociologySYD 4411 Urban LifeTHE 3110 Theatre History ITHE 3111 Theatre History IITHE 4434 Caribbean TheatreTHE 4562 Contemporary Performance TheoryWST 4935 Capstone/Senior Seminar

Total HCD 4/45 11/59 0/3 16Total GLC 1/45 0/59 1/3 2HCD & GLC 0/45 2/59 0/3 2Neither 40/45 46/59 2/3 89

109

APPENDIX E. CAPSTONE LEARNING EXPERIENCE COURSES COLOR-CODED BY FKL DIMENSION: HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY (GOLD), GLOBAL CONTEXT (LIGHT GREEN), AND BOTH (DARK GREEN)



89

APPENDIX F: NON-FKL COURSE PROPOSAL FORM (GLOBAL CITIZENS PROJECT SECTION)

Global Citizens Course Certification InformationFor courses seeking certification as a Global Citizens course, please complete the information below. Refer to the Global Citizens Project (GCP) learning outcome chart for more information on GCP competencies, objectives, and learning outcomes [hyperlink to learning outcome flowchart].

The Global Citizens Project (GCP) addresses three competencies in the areas of Knowledge, Analysis, and Synthesis. Each GCP competency is broken down into two objectives: Cultural Diversity and Global Context. For each objective, a list of specific GCP learning outcomes has been defined. For a course to be certified as a Global

Citizens course, it must incorporate at least two of the three GCP competencies and a minimum of three

GCP learning outcomes across the two (or more) competencies.

______________________________________________________________________________

GCP COMPETENCIES1. Please indicate which GCP competencies are addressed by the course. (Select at least two.)

Knowledge: Knowledge of global and/or cultural systems and issues Analysis: Ability to analyze global and/or cultural interrelationships and interdependencies across place and time Synthesis: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex global or cultural issues and/or

unfamiliar global or cultural situations______________________________________________________________________________

GCP OBJECTIVES2. For each GCP competency selected above, indicate below which GCP objective(s) is incorporated into the

course. At least one objective must be indicated for each selected competency.

Knowledge Cultural Diversity: Knowledge of diverse cultures and associated ideologies, languages, histories, geographies, technologies,

and artistic/cultural expressions Global Context: Knowledge of global systems and issues and associated dimensions (e.g., historical, political, economic, social,

cultural, environmental, technological)

Analysis Cultural Diversity: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of cultural systems and issues across place and

time Global Context: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of global systems and issues across place and time

Synthesis Cultural Diversity: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex cultural issues or unfamiliar

cultural situations Global Context: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex global issues


90

APPENDICES

GCP LEARNING OUTCOMES3. For each GCP objective selected above, please indicate below which GCP learning outcome(s) is incorporated

into the course. At least one learning outcome for each selected objective must be indicated, with a minimum of three learning outcomes total indicated for the course.

Please also state the course-specific learning outcome associated with each selected GCP learning outcome. The same course-specific learning outcome can be used for all GCP learning outcomes, if appropriate.

KnowledgeCultural Diversity: Knowledge of diverse cultures and associated ideologies, languages, histories, geographies, technologies, and artistic/

cultural expressions

In this course, students will: describe multiple dimensions of cultures (e.g. environmental, ideological, linguistic, communicative,

historical, geographic, technological, and/or artistic). recognize that cultural systems experience historical and geopolitical processes differently.

State the course-specific learning outcome(s) from the syllabus and Section 5B of this form that addresses the GCP learning outcome(s) selected above.

Global Context: Knowledge of global systems and issues and associated dimensions (e.g., historical, political, economic, social, cultural, environmental, technological)

In this course, students will: identify and describe major global issues. describe multiple dimensions of global systems (e.g., historical, political, economic, ethical, social, cultural,

environmental, and/or technological). recognize that global issues and systems are experienced differently at local scales.


AnalysisCultural Diversity: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of cultural systems and issues across place and time

In this course, students will: explain the connections among dimensions of cultures. analyze cultures as complex systems shaped by relations of power and interdependence. compare how cultural systems structure basic social categories (e.g., sex, gender, sexuality, age, class,

disability, nationality, race, ethnicity, immigration status). compare the impact of historical and geopolitical processes on cultural systems.



91


Global Context: Ability to analyze interrelationships and interdependencies of global systems and issues across place and time

In this course, students will: explain the connections among dimensions of global systems. analyze global issues and challenges, their histories, and impacts analyze the ethical, social, and environmental challenges of global systems. compare how global issues and systems are experienced at different scales.


SynthesisCultural Diversity: Ability to develop and/or apply context appropriate actions to address complex cultural issues or

unfamiliar cultural situations

In this course, students will: synthesize different types and sources of information to assess cultural issues or situations. incorporate multiple perspectives into decision making when addressing cultural issues or situations. communicate ideas and information to diverse audiences. differentiate patterns in human behavior, beliefs, norms, perceptions, and aspirations.


Global Context: Ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex global issues

In this course, students will: synthesize different types and sources of information to assess global issues. incorporate multiple perspectives (e.g., disciplinary, cultural, ethical) into decision making when addressing

global issues. consider local and/or global impacts of planned actions. weigh options/planned actions and/or formulate possible solutions.

State the course-specific learning outcome(s) from the syllabus and Section 5B of this form that addresses the GCP learning outcome(s) selected above.______________________________________________________________________________


92

APPENDICES

4. Global Citizens Project/Assignment: Every course certified as a Global Citizens course must have a problem-based assignment(s) that can be used for assessment of student learning. The assignment(s) must be labeled Global Citizens Project or Assignment in the syllabus and require students to perform the selections made above. Please describe the problem-based project/assignment for this course and explain how it addresses your selections made above. Submit assignment instructions and requirements (that will be provided to students) to XXXXX.

5. Assessment Commitment: (Indicate departmental commitment to assess Global Citizens Project/Assignment using GCP assessment methods [hyperlink to rubrics].)

The instructor or academic unit offering this course commits to assessing student work using GCP assessment methods, upon request by the Global Citizens Project.



93

APPENDIX G: GLOBAL PATHWAYS CURRICULUM MAP(FROM CUEVAS, MATVEEV, & ZAPATERO 2010)

A Global Citizen engages constructively with diverse people, places, events, challenges, and opportunities.

Global Citizens Project Competency (list as many as appropriate)

Program-specific Global Learning Outcome (add a set of 3 columns for each program learning outcome)

(see legend below) Outcome Statement (X, M)

Level (I, E, R, A)

Feedback/ Assessment (F, A)

Courses Required for the Degree Program (Core)Prefix Number Title

(add rows as needed)

Elective Courses within the Degree ProgramPrefix Number Title

(add rows as needed)

Outcome Statement:The program-specific outcome is (X) Explicitly or (M) Implicitly reflected in the course syllabus as being a learning outcome for the course.

Level of Instruction:(I) Introduced: Students are not expected to be familiar with the content or skill at the collegiate level. Instructional and learning activities focus on basic knowledge, skills, and/or competencies.

(E) Emphasized: Students are expected to possess a basic level of knowledge and familiarity with the content or skills at the collegiate level. Instructional and learning activities concentrate on enhancing and strengthening knowledge, skills, and expanding complexity.

(R) Reinforced: Students are expected to possess a strong foundation in the knowledge, skill, or competency at the collegiate level. Instructional and learning activities continue to build upon previous competencies with increased complexity.

(A) Advanced: Students are expected to possess an advanced level of knowledge, skill, or competency at the collegiate level. Instructional and learning activities focus on the use of the content or skills in multiple contexts and at multiple levels of complexity.

Feedback/Assessment:Students are asked to demonstrate their learning on the outcome through homework, projects, tests, etc and are provided formal (F) Feedback. The course can be used for (A) Assessment in the Global Citizens Project.


94

APPENDICES

APPENDIX H: GLOBAL PATHWAYS TEMPLATE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPlease explain how the major contributes to the development of students as global citizens. How does the major prepare students for success in a global society?

GLOBAL CITIZENS COMPETENCIESIndicate which Global Citizens Project (GCP) competency the degree program addresses (select as many as desired).

Knowledge: knowledge of global and cultural issues and systems Analysis: ability to analyze global and cultural interrelationships and interdependencies across space and

time Synthesis: ability to develop and/or apply context-appropriate actions to address complex issues and/or

unfamiliar situations

DEGREE PROGRAM GLOBAL LEARNING OUTCOMEState the program-specific learning outcome(s) associated with the GCP competencies selected above. The same program-specific learning outcome can be used for all GCP competencies, if appropriate. The program-specific learning outcome should be included in the Academic Learning Compact for the degree program.

CURRICULUM MAPComplete the attached curriculum map to indicate which courses in the degree program align with the program-specific global learning outcome.

“GLOBALIZED” COURSE(S) REQUIRED FOR THE DEGREE PROGRAMAs part of creating a Global Pathway, at least one non-general education course required for the degree program should be certified as a Global Citizens course by the Undergraduate Council. Below please state which course(s) will be/is certified and the stage in the certification process (e.g., under revision/development; under review by the Undergraduate Council, etc.). Non-general education courses with the Global Citizens attribute can be used by students as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Global Citizen Award.

STUDY ABROADIdentify where in the program of study, study abroad best fits in and develop an outline of 1-3 study abroad programs that would enhance the major (location, focus, semester/format: fall/semester long, embedded into course via spring break, summer/4 weeks)

STUDENT AFFAIRS CONNECTIONSWorking in collaboration with Student Affairs and other offices, as appropriate, identify other global/cultural experiences that would enhance the major, such as on-campus service opportunities, internships, research/community engagement projects, etc. COMMUNICATION PLANWhat information will be provided to students regarding the “globalized” major? Include career implications. How will the global/cultural competencies gained through the globalized major be communicated to students?



95

APPENDIX I: PROCESS FOR DECLARING AND COMPLETING THE GLOBAL CITIZEN AWARDS

Students interested in pursuing the Global Citizen Award will:

1) Attend a “Starting Your Adventure” Workshop.

• “Starting Your Adventure” Workshops will be advertised through the Global Citizen Project website, flyers, advisor meetings, digital signage, social media, and campus events.

• Getting Started Workshops Outline

I. Welcome II. Activity Designed to Explore Why A Global Perspective Is Imperative III. What Are The Awards and Requirements? (Presentation-Style) IV. Creating YOUR Adventure Map! (How to fill out and plan for a solid GC Award experience) V. Next Steps:

o Instructions on Enrolling in Canvas Organization & Getting Adventure Map Approved

o Attend an On-Campus Event! Where to Find the Events & Calendar

2) Enroll in the Canvas organization for the Global Citizen Award.

• Once the student has completed a Starting Your Adventure workshop, students will receive an e-mail invitation to the Global Citizen Award Canvas organization. Students must click on the link to enroll themselves in the organization, thereby signaling their intent to pursue the award.

3) Complete an Adventure Map.

• The first module in Canvas provides this follow-up instruction and related “assignment” to which students must submit their completed “Adventure Map.” Introduced in the Starting Your Adventure Workshop, the Adventure Map serves as a “program of study” on which students will intentionally select and plan their path to the Global Citizen Award, based on their unique interests, academic goals, and career paths.

• Once the student completed the Adventure Map, the student will upload this signed document to the Adventure Map module in Canvas. This module functions as a “prerequisite” for all other Award components and instructional modules of the Canvas organization.

• This means that students must complete their Adventure Map prior to submitting documentation for remaining award components.

4) Execute the global activities selected on the Adventure Map and acquire evidence of these activities.

• Once this initial Adventure Map module in Canvas has been successfully completed, the remaining modules in Canvas provide details and “assignments” for each of the award components.

• The Global Citizen Award organization in Canvas has one instructional module for on-campus events, with eight (8) separate assignments, designed as “quizzes” to guide students’ connecting learning outcomes and reflective processes. Through Canvas’ API, USF IT will develop a way to access and aggregate data from these “quizzes” for assessment purposes. Qualifying events will be advertised in the On-Campus Events module in Canvas.


96

APPENDICES

• Campus partners providing opportunities for the Award components have been involved in the planning process, or may have had related programs in existence that have been adapted for the Global Citizen Project. Consequently, students will engage in the Award component as set up by the campus partner, producing evidence of their engagement as they work. Consequently, the campus partner office will be able to verify students’ completion of the relevant award component in the same ways they would verify completion for students not pursuing the Award. However, students pursuing the Award will upload their evidence, which may differ for each Award component, to the respective module in Canvas.

• If preferred by campus partners, arrangements can be made for the campus partner to act as the “teaching assistant” or “grader” for students engaging in their Award component.

5) Submit a “Global Citizen Award Application” form to indicate the Adventure Map is completed.

• Receipt of this form will serve as a catalyst for GCP staff to evaluate students’ work by confirming students’ successful submission of documents and that the coaches have “graded” all submissions.

o The gradebook in Canvas is built to acknowledge and allow students to submit documentation for only the Award components purposefully selected on students’ Adventure Map. The gradebook will ‘drop’ the ‘low scores’ (or scores of 0) for sections that the student has not selected on their Adventure Map. Consequently, when students have completed and the GC Coaches have “graded” the students’ chosen Award components, their grade will show as 100%.

• This Award Application will include programmatic assessment questions and prompt students to complete the Global Perspectives Inventory. Additionally, it will inquire about students’ intent to pursue the Global Citizens Scholar Award.

6) Participate in optional, but highly encouraged, post-Award activities.

• If GCP staff verifies the student has successfully completed their Adventure Map, the student can proceed to the following optional activities:

o Attend a Professional Development Workshop: Translating Your Global Citizen Award Experiences to Graduate Schools and Employers.

o Attend the annual Celebration of Leadership Awards for a formal Global Citizen Award presentation. Students who are unable to attend the Celebration of Leadership Awards may still receive the physical awards.

o Apply for the Global Citizen Study Abroad Scholarship.

o Begin work toward the Global Citizen Scholar Award.

• Students pursuing the Global Citizen Scholar Award, as indicated on their Award Application form, will be manually enrolled by GCP staff into a different, yet structurally similar, Canvas organization for the Global Citizen Scholar Award. Students then repeat steps 2-6.



97

APPENDIX J: SUMMARY OF STUDENT RESPONSES TO QUESTIONNAIRE ON GLOBAL CITIZEN/SHIP

1. Who do you think of when you hear the term global citizen? What words or phrases do you associate with the concept of a global citizen?

The greatest number of responses to this question dealt with having an understanding of other cultures, an awareness of broader issues, and the knowledge of issues on a global scale (environmental issues, political issues, globalization, human rights, etc.). Specific attitudes and characteristics also emerged, including open-

mindedness, tolerance, flexibility and adaptability, cosmopolitanism, and concern and respect for others.

Additionally, a global citizen is someone who is well-traveled and well-educated, multilingual, interacts regularly with other cultures, constantly learns about other cultures, recognizes the differences between cultures, and has lived in other cultures first hand or has a multi-cultural background within their own life experience.

Finally, responses also included politicians, ambassadors, UN members, helping organizations, entrepreneurs; someone whose sense of cultural identity is external to self and sees their place in the larger world.

2. What kinds of activities or other things do global citizens do?

There were three actions that garnered significantly greater responses: Global citizens actively (a) learn and

study other cultures, (b) volunteer in community service and charitable works, and (c) participate in cultural events, customs, and traditions that are different from their own. Other responses to this question included the use of social media to reach out to people from other cultures, holding discussions with international

citizens, learn languages, study abroad, visit sporting events, museums and food-tastings, think green, and remain open-minded and adaptable.

3. Have you ever done anything that would make other people think that you are a global citizen? If so, what has that been?

The two most cited (and related) responses were (a) travelled to another country and (b) studied abroad. Other personal actions included interaction with people from another country at multi-cultural events, live in another country, participate in community service or charity work for an international organization, learn another language, read and study about other cultures, and consumerism (buying products from other countries).


98

APPENDICES

4. Have you ever been involved in activities that allowed you to learn more about individuals from another country or culture outside of your own? Can you describe that activity and what you learned?

The most often cited responses were tourism and travel, followed closely by personal interaction with

international students. Study abroad was also a common activity mentioned. Others included learning more about current world events for classes, interacting with international people through social media, eating food from another country, participating in school courses and clubs, watching documentaries about other cultures, and community service.

5. How can someone be a global citizen while remaining in the US?

Far and away, the greatest number of responses included maintaining a willingness to learn more about other cultures. A variety of other actions included watching the news, learning another language, communicating with other cultures (face-to-face and virtually), participating in student organizations, outreach, and enrichment programs, doing volunteer work and community service, visiting cultural restaurants, and having a desire to travel and a respect for other cultures.

6. Can someone be or consider themselves a global citizen if they haven’t traveled outside of the US?

Most respondents answered “Yes,” with caveats such as maintaining an awareness of other cultures, having a desire to learn, having initiative, staying informed, having an appreciation, respect, and awareness of the world around them, being open-minded, creating international experiences when possible, remaining dedicated to helping others, and having a global mindset. Those who responded “No” said that without the international experience, it isn’t really possible to be a global citizen.



99

APPENDIX K: QEP CAMPUS SURVEY: CONTENT-RELATED QUESTIONS

Question 1: What curricular program additions, changes, and/or enhancements should USF consider that might contribute to the development and enhancement of students’ global competencies, as defined above?

- In General Education- In The Major- Capstone- Other

Question 2: What co-curricular program additions, changes, and/or enhancements should USF consider that might contribute to the development and enhancement of students’ global competencies, as defined above?

- In Residential Life:- In Student Organizations:- In Student Government:- In Student Leadership Development:- In Career Development:- In Community Service:- In Health & Wellness:- In Dining:- In Orientation:- In Other:

Question 3: How might community partnerships or other community engagement opportunities be designed and built to enhance students’ global competencies, as defined above?

Question 4: How might undergraduate research experiences, within courses and classes as well as separate from courses, be developed to enhance students’ global competencies, as defined above?

- Within courses- Separate from courses

Question 5: What can USF do to provide more opportunities for USF students to study abroad?

Question 6: Given that it is unrealistic that all USF students have the opportunity to study abroad, what other strategies might we implement or opportunities might we offer to provide our students with meaningful global experiences?


100

APPENDICES

APPENDIX L: STUDENT GOVERNMENT SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION IN RECOGNITION OF THE QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN

usf.edu/gcp

Karla L. Davis-SalazarQEP Director

[email protected]

R. Stephen RiChardeSACSCOC [email protected]

CONTACT: