Assessment of Integrative Learning On Student Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Programs

Is there enhancement of student skill acquisition and cognitive development  through the use of integrative learning in comparison to more traditional curricular designs? Integrative learning claims to connect learning across courses and disciplines, and between campus and community to prepare students for making informed decisions in their personal, professional, and civic life. Student learning is demonstrated by intellectual, personal and disciplinary development through understanding and connecting knowledge from multiple fields, applying theory and practice to various settings, utilizing diverse and even contradictory views, and understanding issues contextually. We test the hypothesis that highly integrative curricula structure enhances student learning and cognitive development over the relatively short duration of a baccalaureate degree program by measuring the differences among student learning outcomes within traditional segregated discipline oriented curricula and of students immersed in curricula that are designed to place major areas of study in common courses. Specifically, undergraduate student learning outcomes within three units in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources (CANR) at Michigan State University will be measured over a six year longitudinal study. An examination of data from the Learning Environment Preferences (LEP) survey instrument reveals that Perry position 2 (“what to learn”) for 48% of the survey respondents received a score of 26 or greater.  Nearly half the surveyed students have a significant (greater than 25) preference for this level of intellectual development.  Similar to the Perry position 2 data, for the Perry position 3 (“how to learn”) scores, 24% of the students showed a strong preference (scores of 50 or higher).   However, for higher levels of intellectual development (Perry position 3 and Perry position 4, respectively), only 10% of the students showed a strong preference for position 3 (“how to think”), and no students had a score over 46 for position 4 (“how to judge”).  Given that 88% of the students surveyed were freshman or sophomores, these findings support earlier research, that indicate students achieve higher levels of intellectual development in later years.  Twenty-four percent of respondents had scores of less than 40 across all four Perry positions, indicating that they have developed a wide rang of learning approaches equally; or they may not have a clear sense of their own preferences.  Spring 2009-10 semester survey data will be presented.