Big Ideas Projects: 2003-2004
Area: History
Lead Faculty: Michelle Marshman, Green River
Project Goals: Develop written core concepts to be addressed in history survey
courses in Washington two-year colleges; compile and discuss variety of existing
course syllabi in light of these core concepts; share summary of work with history
departments around the state as a reference source/guide for full and part time
instructors.
Activities:
1) Working in discipline and course specific small groups (US and World
instructors), identify the core concepts taught in survey/introductory courses:
 Ancient World Civilization
 Early Modern World Civilization
 Modern World Civilization
 US to 1877
 US 1877 – Present
2) What would a quarter syllabus look like, or how would a quarter syllabus driven
by Big Ideas be different from that currently used? This is a critical question,
as classes may need to be significantly restructured if built around core
concepts rather than being driven by a strict chronological narrative “telling
about everything.”
Area: Psychology
Lead Faculty: Leehu Zysberg, Lake Washington Technical College
Project Goals: Comparison of teachers’ and students’ notions of core concepts in
the area of developmental psychology as a way of understanding more fully what
students conceptions and misconceptions about the subject matter and exploring
how to address those misconceptions and teach/assess the core concepts most
effectively.
Activities:
1. Brainstorm with faculty and create a list of “big ideas” for the area of
developmental psychology.
1
2. Near the end of the quarter interview students to gather data about their
understandings of the big ideas they learned during the quarter and how
their understandings had changed during the quarter.
3. Do a content analysis and comparison of the data gathered from both
faculty and students.
4. Disseminate findings and share recommendations for next steps/further
study.
Area: General Education
Lead Faculty: Gwen James, Columbia Basin College
Project Goals: Develop descriptions for our General Education Outcomes and
rubrics for assessing them. Because of the process we intend to engage in, this
will tie in to the Big Ideas from each discipline as they use these ideas as the
foundation for connecting the disciplinary areas to the broader general education
outcomes.
Activities: This year, we will bring in a facilitator (Robin Jeffers, Bellevue) to work
with two different groups of 6 faculty in developing descriptions and rubrics for
two of our general education outcomes, Critical Thinking and Quantitative
Reasoning. These meetings will be focused as much on process as they are on
content so that those who work with the facilitator/trainer will be able to turn
around next year and lead the same sort of workshop with two new groups of
faculty working on two new outcomes. This work will, in the next few years, be
filtered down through division, departments, and into classroom assessments as
these groups and individual faculty use the materials and standards developed to
inform program building and assessment, department assessment programs and
standards, and syllabi, curriculum design, and assessment for individual courses.
The project lead (Gwen James) will track the process as it unfolds and develop
some materials around it which can be presented at a future Assessment
Conference as a case study of both the process and the outcomes.
Area: Chemistry
Lead Faculty: Tris Samberg, Edmonds Community College
Project Goals:
 Short term: Synthesize a “Big Ideas” list for at least two levels of chemistry
instruction, e.g. liberal arts chemistry and allied health chemistry
2

Long term: Make “Big Ideas” a regular topic of discussion at annual Washington
College Chemistry Teachers Association (WCCTA) conference in which we 1)
refine, clarify and modify the list, 2) design activities that engage learners
around a “Big Idea”, 3) analyze student work to determine depth of student
learning of the “Big Idea” and 4) create a document for WCCTA members
containing the collectively determined list of “Big Ideas” by level and sample
activities.
Activities: The lead faculty contact will organize a meeting date in early spring for
interested chemistry faculty to generate a draft “Big Ideas” list for at least two
levels of chemistry instruction. These lists will then be reviewed, clarified and/or
modified at the next WCCTA annual meeting (Oct 2004), which is a joint meeting
with 2YC3 (Two-Year College Chemistry Consortium). The joint WCCTA/2YC3
meeting will provide larger, regional audience and opportunity for additional
viewpoints.
Area: Speech Communication
Lead Faculty: Sandra Cross, Edmonds
Project Goals:
 Provide an on-going discussion forum for the seminal concepts and skills
deemed integral to this discipline.
 Clarify and connect to existing practice some of the key Big Ideas presented
in the speech communication Big Ideas Project discussion of April 2003.
 Demonstrate assessment methods and assignments which evaluate the
concepts and skills discussed in the online forums.
Activities:
We plan to use BlackBoard to host an on-going online discussion forum focused on
the above goals, inviting all previous contributors as well as other full-time and
part-time faculty at the participating community colleges to join in this
conversation. This asynchronous model may provide an expanded opportunity both
for more participation and a deeper discussion of the disciplinary ideas discussed
at the initial gathering, which generated several seminal concepts from among the
various areas of our discipline but were not directly addressed by the theory area
in the final summary. In the proposed online discussion forum, we will have
separate discussions for each of the above bulleted areas and to further divide
these into specific discipline and instructional delivery areas, such as the
3
fundamentals course, interpersonal communication, intercultural communication,
small group communication, public speaking, oral interpretation of literature course,
and so on. After a set period of discussion during Winter Quarter 2004, we will
compile the information from the various discussions and share these results with
the colleges involved and the statewide assessment community.
Area: Composition
Lead Faculty: Jennifer Whetham, Green River, Robin Jeffers, Bellevue,
Becky Rosenberg, UW—Bothell
Project Goals:
 Work toward clarifying what, if any, consensus exists around the “big ideas”
that should be addressed in college composition courses
 Explore current issues and similarities/differences in the kinds of writing
assignments and assessments used in Composition courses around the state
Activities:
In earlier years, beginning as early as 1991, the state assessment effort focused
considerable attention to issues related to Composition, sponsoring several
different focused gatherings, a systematic summary of Composition offerings and
activities around the two-year college system, and supporting a 3-year effort
called the Writing/Thinking Project focusing on the role of writing in Composition
courses as well as the use of writing to teach and learn in a variety of disciplinary
contexts. We plan to convene a statewide retreat for Composition faculty on April
29-30, 2004; present preliminary findings at the state Assessment Conference
(May 5-7 in Vancouver, WA); and propose plans for follow-up activities in 2004-05
based on what emerges from the state retreat.
4