Session 4: Peer Review of Proposals and Discussion of HIPs in the States Proposal Review/Submission Rubric
Session 4: Peer Review of Proposals and Discussion of HIPs in the States Proposal Review/Submission Rubric
In this 60-minute session, we will divide into breakout rooms in Zoom to give and receive peer feedback on proposal drafts. By the end of this session, you should be able to make final edits and submit your proposal to meet the priority deadline for final proposal submissions on March 1.
The Assessment Institute website has a great webpage that lists all of the information you will need to submit a proposal before the March 1 deadline.
A team of colleagues will review proposal submissions for this year's HIPs in the States Track at the Assessment Institute. Each proposal submission is reviewed by multiple members of this proposal review team. Each reviewer will use the following rubric this year when reviewing and scoring proposal submissions. We are making this available to you now to help in your proposal development efforts.
The following two items will be used to scored/review proposals for the HIPs in the States track.
Item # 1: Overall Quality of Proposal Submission (scored from 1-4).
4 = proposal submission is excellent and complete. Proposal includes learning outcomes for the presentation and describes how participants will be involved in achieving these outcomes during the session; proposal is highly relevant to the field of high-impact practices and engaged/applied/experiential learning; proposal clearly and effectively addresses the importance of gathering evidence of impact in these experiences; data/results are presented/shared; and proposal discusses how results are used for continuous improvement
3 = proposal is good and complete. Proposal includes learning outcomes for the session and how participants will be engaged during the session. Proposal is relevant to the field of high-impact practices. Data/results are presented/discussed.
2 = proposal is adequate. Proposal includes learning outcomes for the session. Proposal addresses at least one high-impact practice.
1 = proposal is insufficient and lacks basic information – including learning outcomes and information on how participants will be engaged in the session. Data, results, assessment work are not included.
Refer = proposal is appropriate for Assessment Institute – but does not fit within the HIPs in the States track
Reject = proposal does not fit the Assessment Institute
Item # 2: Impact to the Field and Competitive Preference Priority (scored 0-2)
2 = proposal moves the field of high-impact practices forward in important and meaningful ways – AND - addresses one of the 4 competitive preference priorities (online/hybrid HIPs, scaling HIPs, racial/social justice in HIPs, and HIPs professional development)
1 = proposal moves the field of high-impact practices forward in important and meaningful ways – OR – addresses one of the 4 competitive preference priorities
0 = proposal does not move field of high-impact practices forward in important and meaningful ways – AND – does not address one of the 4 competitive preference priorities
We have gathered several high-quality proposal submissions from the 2020 Assessment Institute's HIPs in the States Track. We hope these examples can be useful to you as you develop your own proposal submission for the 2021 HIPs in the States track.
Please remember - we have four special interest areas this year that have been the focus of this professional development series. While some of the examples below touch on one of these interest areas, others do not. We are making these proposals available as examples of high-quality submissions, not necessarily because they touch on one of the four interest areas. Special thanks to our colleagues for agreeing to let us make these proposal submissions available to you as a resource/example.
Example 1: Integrating Experiential Learning into Online Education
Example 2: Approaches to Integrating ePortfolios through High Impact Faculty Development
Example 3: What's really going on? Observing a high-impact practice "in action"
Example 4: Equity and Inclusivity in the Assessment of High Impact Practices
Example 5: Embedding Course-Based Undergraduate Research into Curricula to Promote Equity
As a reminder, proposals centered around the four themes are encouraged:
Online/Hybrid Delivery
Delivery and assessment of high-impact practices in online or hybrid modalities (curricular and co-curricular)
Social and Racial Justice
Intentional efforts to make HIPs more equitable through social and racial justice, including developing HIPs that take up social and racial justice issues as well as high impact instructional approaches that increase learning, retention, and post-graduation success for underrepresented student populations
Scaling
Institutional scaling of high-impact experiences, including the tracking and assessment of student learning and success
Faculty/Professional Development
Designing high-impact courses and experiences that are aligned to the central features of high-impact practices and experiences, with a focus on professional development, inclusiveness, and universal design