Assessment Details
Academic Year: 2019-2020 Level: Undergraduate
Campus Department: Mission & Ministry [UG and Grad]
Program Type: Co-Curricular Program [UG and Grad]
Program Name: Arrupe (Link)
Description of Data Collection:
Data from qualitative and quantitative assessments were used to compare graduates’ experiences to the program’s Learning Outcomes. Basic demographic data was established from the Division of Mission and Ministry’s program database, which tracks participation information across UMM programs. Institutional Research and Planning (IRP) provided in-depth quantitative data that included cross-tabulated information from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and the College Senior Survey (CSS). A faculty member in the Lynch School of Education and Human Development conducted focus groups with past student leaders, participants, and adult mentors in March 2019.
Review Process:
Data collected from this assessment have been reviewed by a cohort from across the Division of Mission and Ministry. The group meets every-other-month to discuss best practice in preparing learning outcomes, designing assessment questions, and developing improvements. The cohort was assisted by in-depth analysis from IRP, which provided extensive data from University assessments that helped inform graduates understanding of program learning outcomes.
Resulting Program Changes:
Create overall thematic approach and cohorts for Arrupe trips
-Grouping trips by theme (for example: environment, globalization, and migration) as opposed to location will allow the program to develop a more pedagogically-sound and justice-oriented experience for participants. I n informal conversations with students, they have struggled to explain the program to others. Themes help give understandable structure that better enable participants to talk about Arrupe.
-A thematic approach will allow for both inter- and intra- group reflections. For example, students on an environmental trip in Puebla, Mexico can combine a post-trip meeting with the Costa Rica trip and reflect on shared experiences, meaningful interactions and stories, and the realities of the communities visited. Unlike other service-immersion programs in Campus Ministry, Arrupe has tended to be more “siloed” by design. Our use of themes seeks to dismantle those siloes within Arrupe so that participants can better know one another. We hope to leverage the strength of that community to educate the wider campus around issues connected to the themes of our Arrupe trips.
-Thematic approaches can help participants better grapple with the “now what” question that occurs post-trip. Students will more easily be able to identify opportunities for solidarity and action in relation to the environment, globalization, migration, etc.
-The introduction of Faculty Fellows is key here. Faculty, experts in the themes Arrupe explore, can accompany trips and help participants process and synthesize experiences. This also enables rapport building and establishes relationships so that, upon returning to the U.S., students can work with faculty to identify realistic plans for engaging in solidarity and action beyond Arrupe.
-Adult Mentors are also important in this. Mentors need to be role models for the students; recruiting mature graduate students and full-time faculty who can fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the safety and welfare of participants in-country, while modeling lives of faith and justice throughout the experience, is necessary for the success of the program.
Arrupe’s last E1A focused on the need for ongoing conversation post-trip and the development of Solidarity Statements by each participant, detailing what they believe they need to do to more likely “live in solidarity” on an ongoing basis, and three specific commitments they will make in expressing their definition of solidarity. Program retreats have involved reflection around these questions, and though there is no specific evidence related to the change, data from IRP suggests that 80% of Arrupe participants engaged in “activities or organizations which promoted social justice” versus 53.4% of non-participant peers.
Date of Most Recent Program Review:
Create overall thematic approach and cohorts for Arrupe trips
-Grouping trips by theme (for example: environment, globalization, and migration) as opposed to location will allow the program to develop a more pedagogically-sound and justice-oriented experience for participants. I n informal conversations with students, they have struggled to explain the program to others. Themes help give understandable structure that better enable participants to talk about Arrupe.
-A thematic approach will allow for both inter- and intra- group reflections. For example, students on an environmental trip in Puebla, Mexico can combine a post-trip meeting with the Costa Rica trip and reflect on shared experiences, meaningful interactions and stories, and the realities of the communities visited. Unlike other service-immersion programs in Campus Ministry, Arrupe has tended to be more “siloed” by design. Our use of themes seeks to dismantle those siloes within Arrupe so that participants can better know one another. We hope to leverage the strength of that community to educate the wider campus around issues connected to the themes of our Arrupe trips.
-Thematic approaches can help participants better grapple with the “now what” question that occurs post-trip. Students will more easily be able to identify opportunities for solidarity and action in relation to the environment, globalization, migration, etc.
-The introduction of Faculty Fellows is key here. Faculty, experts in the themes Arrupe explore, can accompany trips and help participants process and synthesize experiences. This also enables rapport building and establishes relationships so that, upon returning to the U.S., students can work with faculty to identify realistic plans for engaging in solidarity and action beyond Arrupe.
-Adult Mentors are also important in this. Mentors need to be role models for the students; recruiting mature graduate students and full-time faculty who can fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the safety and welfare of participants in-country, while modeling lives of faith and justice throughout the experience, is necessary for the success of the program.
Arrupe’s last E1A focused on the need for ongoing conversation post-trip and the development of Solidarity Statements by each participant, detailing what they believe they need to do to more likely “live in solidarity” on an ongoing basis, and three specific commitments they will make in expressing their definition of solidarity. Program retreats have involved reflection around these questions, and though there is no specific evidence related to the change, data from IRP suggests that 80% of Arrupe participants engaged in “activities or organizations which promoted social justice” versus 53.4% of non-participant peers.
Attachments (if available)