DIS Academic Program Review
April 2007
(including DIS response pp. 9-16)
The Learning Abroad Center appointed review team is pleased to present the following report on the Denmark International Study Program (DIS) in Copenhagen, Denmark.
We wish to make clear that we greatly appreciate the cooperation of DIS and that this report is a review of DIS’s academic program and not a comprehensive evaluation of the entire DIS program.
Note: Some IEW workshop participants expressed the value of having the University of Minnesota review available publicly through a link on DIS’s website. The review committee has no objection to this request and leaves it to the Learning Abroad Center and DIS to discuss the nature and extent of any public version of this report.
INTRODUCTION
The committee found that DIS is a quality, well-organized program that actively seeks and successfully demonstrates an exceptional level of curricular innovation. It has strong academic offerings that are taught with a high degree of rigor by highly qualified faculty. The committee was impressed with the level of ownership that the administration, faculty and support staff feel for the goals and mission of the organization and their genuine desire to meet the needs of US institutions and their students. DIS should be commended on the formalization of its review process, and the committee noted that the DIS administration, faculty and staff utilized a balanced and thorough analysis in the discussion of their own programs. The committee also recognizes DIS’s unique position as an internationally based study organization that has successfully created a wide range of programs and comprehensive student support services for US students.
The committee wholeheartedly endorses the DIS program and feels that DIS meets all necessary specifications to warrant University of Minnesota School of Record credit. The specific recommendations in this report will help to enhance the current academic offerings and ensure the continuation of their quality curriculum in the future. A timeline for DIS to update the University of Minnesota on its progress regarding the recommendations needs to be determined.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DIS is a vibrant mission- and vision-driven educational institution. Over the last 48 year, it has established s a strong sense of identity. The core mission is to provide an English-based undergraduate learning environment in an international setting that incorporates an emphasis on intercultural competency development. This mission is championed by the DIS leadership and is embraced by the entire staff. The vision permeates the organization and helps to nurture an institutional identity.
DIS offers 10 content-specific semester programs and four summer programs that are designed to complement undergraduate curricula and majors. The overall programmatic model is a combination of didactic core course with “hands-on” learning opportunities and two study tours each semester. An example of this model is the program in Psychology & Child Development. It consists of a core course (Multiculturalism in the fall and summer and Children with Disabilities in the fall, spring and summer). The hands-on learning opportunity is a semester-long practicum in the Danish preschool. It is complemented by a short and long study tour that enhances the curriculum. The core courses are then supplemented with a series of major specific electives that provide more in-depth learning opportunities for the student. The specific interplay between these components obviously varies by program.
In addition to these mandatory study tours, DIS offers optional study tours during the two-week semester break. Many students participate in the optional tours, and DIS provides an opportunity to travel to non-traditional destinations such as Russia, Poland and China. These study tours are complimented by various adventure tours, which are non-academic in nature.
DIS offers a variety of housing options: homestay, apartment living with Danish students, and Kollegium (dormitory-style accommodation). The homestay offers the greatest cultural integration while the other options offer greater proximity to the inner city. Students typically receive their preference and are distributed across all housing options.
Historically, program evaluation and modification was a continual, active and organic process that was conducted by the DIS leadership team and the program directors. The vehicle used for this programmatic review and planning for the future revolved around the preparation of the annual brochure. It was conducted by a formal review of each program based on student evaluations, faculty input, and assessment by the program directors. The review was discussed and finalized with the DIS leadership team. In the last year, DIS has conducted a more formal S.W.O.T. analysis of its curricular elements with a clear delineation of programmatic Strengths, Weakness, Opportunity and Threats.
DIS enrollments continue to grow by more than 5% annually, and enrollment for fall semester 2007-2008 is expected to exceed 500 students.
METHODOLOGY
The evaluation site visit team was composed of three members: Heidi Soneson (Chair), Learning Abroad Center; Charles Oberg, Institute of Child Development; Leslie Van Duzer, School of Architecture.
The three members of the site visit team each reviewed the history, annual reports, and student evaluations of the DIS program. They studied the course catalogue and reviewed course syllabi for program courses; they read annual program reports; they reviewed statistical information on the participants (numbers, gender, major, sending institutions, etc.). They reviewed staff and instructor curriculum vitae; they reviewed the pre-departure orientation packet and the on-site orientation schedule. They reviewed student evaluations. They received feedback from sending institutions through informal contact at the International Educators Workshop (IEW), which was held during the same week as the review team’s visit. The IEW brings together approximately 50 faculty and staff from DIS sending institutions twice a year for a weeklong introduction to DIS through course visitations, staff and student presentations, and cultural activities.
In preparation for the site visit, DIS informed its teaching faculty of the review team visit, organized a faculty meeting with the review team, organized a meeting with the review team and University of Minnesota students studying at DIS (14 students this semester), and arranged meetings with all key administrative staff.
During the seven-day visit, team members visited classes across the curriculum, observed practicum sessions, met with the DIS elected faculty representatives, spoke with a wide variety of individual instructors, met with University of Minnesota students, attended additional student panels organized by IES for the IEW workshop, met with the DIS program directors, housing coordinator, and the new DIS chief financial officer, and visited the University of Copenhagen where students can enroll in courses with Danish students. In addition, the review team members spoke informally with a variety of faculty and staff from sending institutions at the IEW workshop to learn about their impression of DIS’s program and to discuss their home institution curricular needs. Finally, team members participated in a number of cultural activities that are also organized for students during the semester. The schedule for the three review team members is attached.
The site review team jointly drafted and agreed on recommendations that are made part of this report.
The evaluation report is divided into the sections below.
I. ACADEMIC Rigor, Oversight and Structure
A. Range of Academic Offerings
1. New Course Identification
The committee appreciated the current range of programs and courses and DIS’s ability to successfully identify important emerging issues, such as Human Trafficking. In addition, DIS has a sound strategy for introducing these new areas through initial summer offerings and then expanded integration as appropriate.
Future Considerations: Potential new areas of growth could include engineering classes and possibly an intensive summer business internship program. Additionally, the committee found interesting the idea of offering short continuing education courses for professionals in relevant fields. Certain US professions such as medicine, law and architecture require continuing education credits. Considering the success that DIS has demonstrated with their study tour initiatives, this might be an ideal format.
2. Program Evaluation
The committee noted that historically program evaluation and modification was a continual, active and organic process that was conducted by the DIS leadership team and the program directors around the preparation of the annual brochure. In the last year, DIS has conducted a more formal S.W.O.T. analysis of its curricular elements with a clear delineation of programmatic Strengths, Weakness, Opportunity and Threats.
Recommendation: DIS presently uses the two annual IEW workshops and the faculty plenary to generate new curricular ideas. DIS may wish to survey its partner institutions through a more formal evaluation process to identify new areas of interest.
B. Programmatic Administration
The program directors are energetic and competent individuals who demonstrate commitment to their academic areas. The committee also found it sound planning to hire assistant program directors to complement program directors in areas that were beyond the scope of their own academic expertise. As DIS grows there will be a need for additional oversight to ensure programmatic consistency within and across programs.
Recommendation: The review committee recommends that the newly configured group of program directors and elected faculty oversee consistency of quality, content and structure. This newly formed committee should be chaired by a program director and co-chaired by a faculty member, both of who would report to the executive committee. This would parallel curriculum committees that are common at US institutions of higher education.
Recommendation: Because DIS has single program directors for multiple programs, the committee encourages DIS to continue the assistant program director model whenever appropriate and to consider the value of hiring a faculty member for this role. This has been done successfully, for example, in Psychology and Child Development. As DIS continues to grow, the committee anticipates that DIS will find it useful to expand this strategy.
C. Teaching
1. Quality of Instruction
The overall quality of the teaching was solid and reflected the strong professional expertise of its faculty body. The committee found that some of the classes were truly exceptional, and others were not quite as high; no doubt this would be observed at any institution, including in the US.
Recommendation: The committee noted that interns were assigned to courses. DIS should ensure that interns continue to provide only logistical support and only serve as teaching assistants if they have at least a masters degree and previous teaching experience. The exception would be skill-building assignments in Architecture. As part of a future teacher workshop at the University of Minnesota, it would be helpful to have a module on the role of teaching assistants in US institutions.
Recommendation: In addition to the teacher workshop held at the University of Minnesota, the committee recommends that a teaching pedagogue from the University of Minnesota or another US partner institution be invited to one of the IEW workshops each year to conduct a workshop for the DIS faculty on teaching and discussion techniques in US institutions.
2. Student Evaluation
The committee noted that DIS takes student evaluations seriously and conducts a comprehensive compilation of quantitative and qualitative assessment each semester.
Recommendation: US institutions balance student evaluations with other oversight mechanisms to ensure teaching quality and curricular integrity. US institutions, as in Denmark, also highly value the academic freedom of individual instructors. This review committee suggests that a possible place for the additional oversight would be with the proposed DIS curriculum committee or some other explicit process that would ensure on-going review of course content as articulated in the course syllabus. This would also include a process for faculty hiring, retention and dismissal as well as curriculum development and evaluation. This process respects and supports the individual instructors in the context of the entire curriculum. With the anticipated growth in enrollment at DIS, this process will ensure curricular integrity within and across programs.
3. Contact Hours, Class Sizes and Student Academic Background
In our review of selected syllabi, the number of classroom contact hours and out-of-classroom readings and assignments met or exceeded typical US standards in most disciplines. Teacher-student ratio meets US standards and in some cases exceeds those expectations. Some students expressed frustration and some faculty expressed the challenge of having such diverse levels of academic preparations in the same course.
Recommendation: With the anticipated expansion of enrollment and curricular development, there will be an-going need to monitor class size, student-teacher ratio, quality instructions, and the diversity of student academic background. The current model of multiple sections for a single course is one possibility. In addition, DIS should continue to identify courses or sections with pre-requisites in order to identify introductory and more advanced student groups.
4. Experiential Learning
DIS’s pedagogical approach to complimenting classroom instruction with field study and study tours is a unique feature that is being implemented very successfully. It is clearly a major component of the academic program, and it has been effectively implemented across all programs. It augments the education that students receive in the US, and the students consistently commented that this aspect is a unique and exciting part of their experience. The committee participated in several field study opportunities and found them to be engaging and an excellent way to integrate theoretical classroom learning with the current Danish context. Students commented that the study tours were all well-organized and a valuable learning experience. The committee supports DIS’s continued strong emphasis on this experiential learning component, and it is clearly a significant feature in attracting US students to their program.
Recommendation: The committee recommends that DIS attempt to maximize contact with local experts and the indigenous population on its study tours whenever possible.
D. Assessment of Student Work
1. Grades
The committee commends DIS for its high expectations for student achievement. Student concerns that DIS is “too demanding” were not a concern to this committee.
The committee noted a number of US institutions grant pass/fail credit for DIS courses, and the high level of DIS academic expectations helps to foster rigorous academic learning.
Recommendation: Following a review of the DIS information on grading and interviews held with students, the committee observed variability on both expectations and grade distribution across and even within programs. The committee encourages DIS to move towards greater consistency within and across programs.