In your student years, many of you participated in campus-related activities such as intramural sports, student clubs, student government, or athletics. You probably categorized all of these under the term “extracurricular,” and considered their benefits to range from stress relief to social networking–anything to get as far away as possible from grueling academics. Chances are you never thought of these as activities for serious student learning. If you were told that the activity had student learning outcomes and that you would be assessed after participating, you might have thought twice about signing up! That was certainly my case.
As an educator now and as I have been involved in CU’s reaffirmation of accreditation, I am rethinking the role of all the activities and experiences that I have previously lumped together as “extracurricular.” In our HLC Criteria and Core Component questions that the Steering Committee are busy answering, there is no mention of extracurricular activities; however, there are several places where the term “co-curricular” and “co-curricular assessment” are mentioned.
So what’s the difference and why the emphasis on co-curriculars? According to Merriam-Webster, “extracurricular is used to describe extra activities (such as sports) that can be done by the students in a school but that are not part of the regular schedule of classes.” Co-curricular, according to the Glossary of Educational Reform, “refers to activities, programs, and learning experiences that complement, in some way, what students are learning in school—i.e., experiences that are connected to or mirror the academic curriculum.”
The HLC Guiding Values, the underlying philosophy that drives the Criteria and Core Components, state, “A focus on student learning encompasses every aspect of students’ experience at an institution: how they are recruited and admitted; costs they are charged and how they are supported by financial aid; how well they are informed and guided before and through their work at the institution; the breadth, depth, currency, and relevance of the learning they are offered; their education through co-curricular offerings; the effectiveness of their programs; what happens to them after they leave the institution.” (emphasis mine)
Because of the emphasis on the educational value of the overall experience of students enrolled in a university, HLC wants to know how students learn from not only academics (curriculars) but also from co-curriculars. At Cedarville, we offer many activities, organizations, and distinctive experiences outside of the academic area that provide excellent opportunities for student learning. In order to document this, however, each organization or activity needs to have clearly stated student learning outcomes that align with the University Mission Statement along with a way to assess those outcomes.
During June the Steering Committee Leadership group met with a number of leaders around campus that are responsible for co-curriculars. We are very excited about the innovative ways these leaders ensure student learning and are developing means to assess the outcomes. One of these outstanding areas is Student Life Programs, led by Brian Burns, Director of Student Life Programs, under the direction of Jonathan Wood, Vice President for Student Life and Christian Ministries. These programs have processes in place that tie all of their student groups to mission-driven goals and outcomes. They are very intentional about what they want students to learn and how they go about achieving that.
The Student Life Programs’ Mission Statement emphasizes “lifelong leaders who influence” in an arena of programs that are “distinctively Christ centered.” This reinforces the University Mission as a “Christ-centered learning community equipping students for lifelong leadership.” Based on these, the commitment of Student Life Programs is to develop students into lifelong leaders. They accomplish this through mandatory training offered through several CU LEAD programs. In order to ensure that learning takes place, the leader of each student-led group event, program, or service must complete a “3P’s Report” which establishes its purpose, procedure, and plan. This report must be submitted to and reviewed by the Director or Assistant Director of Student Life Programs BEFORE any planning begins. The purpose “provides the framework for accountability and assessment” of the event, program, or service. This report becomes the basis for a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) conducted by the group AFTER the event. Each member of the group is required to submit 2-3 strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, which is then compiled and completed by the leader of the group. The procedure for analysis utilizes the Student Life Programs Mission, the student learning outcomes for the group (which are aligned with the Core Outcomes of the Student Life and Christian Ministries division), and the actual event, program, or service. This formal process allows the Director of Student Life Programs, the leader of each group, and each member of the group to assess how well the event, program, or service supported the Mission and student learning outcomes.
We’re excited about co-curriculars at CU! We should be proud of and thankful for all those leading and laboring in areas such as Global Outreach Domestic, Global Outreach International, Heartsong, International Programs, International Study Abroad, Athletics, Intramurals, and others. I hope that you will have a new respect for all the student activities and groups happening at Cedarville. They’re not extra–they’re CO-curricular. They all contribute to producing graduates who 1) Glorify God, 2) Think Broadly and Deeply, 3) Communicate Effectively, 4) Develop Academically and Professionally, and 5) Engage for Christ.
For your reference, the following Criteria Core Component statements require evidence that we take our co-curricular offerings very seriously and that we are intentional in ensuring that all students achieve the learning outcomes that we state. If you would like us to learn more about co-curriculars offered in YOUR area, please do not hesitate to contact us at syang@cedarville.edu or leave a comment to this post.
3.E.1. Co-curricular programs are suited to the institution’s mission and contribute to the educational experience of its students.
4.B.2. The institution assesses achievement of the learning outcomes that it claims for its curricular and refers to activities, programs, and learning experiences that complement, in some way, what students are learning in school—i.e., experiences that are connected to or mirror the academic curriculum and co-curricular programs.
4.B.3. The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning.
Posted in: Uncategorized