Page 87 - FSTE A5 Handbook

Evaluation is meant to “guide the next step” (Stenhouse, 1975), but it can only do so effectively
if curriculum development builds in “evaluation pauses” such as the reported study, which
allows an in-depth period of reflection. In contrast to classic experimental research, the
outcome of this evaluation did not make any judgement, but, rather, illuminated what was
happening to students when they moved from the community colleges to universities,
particularly in the process of obtaining credit transfer for their GE courses. The previous
chapters have deliberated on this, but hindsight can only go so far in helping with determining
the best way to move forward. This chapter focuses on foresight that hopefully would guide
the next step to curriculum improvement in GE.
Common Understanding of General Education

The need for a shared understanding of what constitutes GE in undergraduate studies, with
due recognition of variations in curricular contents, has now begun to emerge. The Kereluik’s
Framework of 21st century knowledge appears to encompass most attributes described
in the GE curricula and can, therefore, be considered as a common paradigm guiding the
development of individual curricula in the context of the local institution.

Most GE emphasizes whole person development and many institutions list the desirable
graduate attributes such as critical and creative thinking, sense of social responsibility, cultural
literacy, language literacy and global citizenry. These attributes are quite similar across
institutions, albeit they are named differently in different contexts. The challenge is how to
ensure the GE courses facilitate students in the development of these characteristics. As the
attributes are broad and open to different interpretations, there is a need to further define
them in more universally acceptable and measurable terms. It would be very useful for guiding
the development of new GE courses and considering an individual student’s application for
credit transfer.

74