FACULTY DEVELOPMENT DAY GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT

undefined
FACULTY DEVELOPMENT DAY
GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
Donna Sundre, EdD
Executive Director, Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS)
Professor of Graduate Psychology
James Madison University
Kara Siegert, PhD
Director University Analysis, Reporting, & Assessment
Salisbury University
January 21, 2010
Purpose
To encourage a discussion of common assessment
misconceptions and description of the assessment process.
The ultimate goals for the day are to:
provide assessment resources and best practices,
describe the assessment process,
discuss the role SU faculty will play in developing the
assessment process at the institution, and
collect feedback from faculty on assessment strategies
that they recommend for collecting data on student
achievement of General Education outcomes
ITINERARY
 9:00-9:15
-   Introductions & Itinerary
 9:15-10:00
- Assessment Misconceptions
10:00-10:45
-Assessment Process & Assessment at SU
10:45-11:30
-Data Collection Methods
11:30-12:00
-Developing a Culture of Assessment
12:00-12:30
-Working Lunch-Wicomico Room
12:30-1:00
-  Provost Allen
 1:00-1:30
-  Questions & Introduction to Afternoon Activity
 1:30-3:00
-  Roundtables
 3:00-4:00
-  Faculty Feedback
undefined
CRIMES, MISDEMEANORS, AND
FELONIES THAT PREVENT A
CULTURE OF ASSESSMENT
 
Crime, Consequence, and Rehabilitation
Crime:  Practice (or non-practice) that results in the
breakdown of the assessment process
Consequence:  How the crime affects your
assessment program
Rehabilitation:  How to fix the offending behavior
Of course there are different levels of offenses;
we’ve divided our examples into “misdemeanors”
and “felonies”
Crime:  Focus only on Weaknesses
   
   
Level:  Misdemeanor I
Consequence:  Faculty and administrators complain
that assessment focuses on faults
Rehabilitation:  Look specifically for strengths, report
and publicize them; provide balanced feedback
Crime:  Use of Unnecessary Jargon
 
Level:  Misdemeanor I
Consequence:  Rolling Eyes (i.e., a lack of interest and, worse,
a lack of understanding of results)
Rehabilitation:  Know your audience.  Present at their level.
Complex analyses are often useful and appropriate, but offer
these in an appendix, technical report, or talk to someone
after the meeting.
Crime: GE and the assessment of GE goals and outcomes
are the responsibility of the faculty that teach GE only
Level:  Misdemeanor I
Consequence:    Faculty teaching in non-General
Education courses will disengage with General
Education conversations
Rehabilitation:    GE includes the most fundamental skills
and is therefore taught across all courses, majors, and
faculty. Faculty from all disciplines should play a role in
developing GE assessments.
Crime: Using Course Grades as Evidence of
Student Learning
Level:  Misdemeanor II
Consequence:  Specific conclusions about student
learning and achievement of student learning
outcomes cannot be determined making it difficult
to “close the loop”
Rehabilitation:  Develop assessment methods and
evaluation strategies  that are directly aligned with
learning outcomes
Crime :  Forgetting that All Research has
Limitations 
 
Level:      Misdemeanor II
Consequence:    Faculty will question whether results are
indicative of students’ true ability because
Student aren’t motivated
Sample was too small
Test/Instrument isn’t perfect
We need more analyses, data, etc
Rehabilitation:   Use the assessment process and results to
improve and inform the process. There will always be
factors outside of our control. The key is appropriate
interpretation of results; faculty should guide this.
Crime:  Only Recommending Multiple-Choice
Tests for Assessment
Level:  Misdemeanor III
Consequence:  Skeptical faculty and administrators.
They are more likely to question the validity of the
data.
Rehabilitation:  Use the Student Learning Goals and
outcomes to determine the most appropriate method
of data collection.
Crime:  Surprise Stakeholders with Poor Results
Level:  Misdemeanor III
Consequence:  Defensive faculty and administrators.  They are
more likely to try to undermine assessment efforts.
Rehabilitation:  Share poor results informally with stakeholders
first.  Have them brainstorm why results turned out so.  Include
them in presentations.
Crime:  Assessment Reports Collect Dust
 
Level:  Felony
Consequence:  Faculty will consider assessment a
bureaucratic exercise invented by administrators
and government for the sole purpose of torturing
them.
Rehabilitation:  Make sure time and resources are
allotted for faculty to consider and use assessment
results.
Crime:  Assessment Data Reported at the
Individual Faculty Level
  
Level:  Felony (Capital Offense)
Consequence:  ‘Audit’ mode confirmed; faculty assume
results are being use to assess them, not programs.
Expect mass hysteria and mutiny.
Rehabilitation:  There may be none. Administration will
need to earn respect. Allow faculty to interpret
findings and suggest improvements.
Things to Consider
You already do assessment!
Systematic basis for making inferences about student
development and growth
Think about why you go to work everyday—
your purpose
Do you see your students as your partners in
learning?
What feedback from your partners would be most
beneficial for program improvement?
Final Questions
What assessment crimes have you seen committed here or
at other institutions?
What assessment crimes are you most concerned might
take place at SU?
How can we best assure that these misdemeanors and
felonies are not committed at SU?
Other Questions, Comments, or Concerns?
undefined
ASSESSMENT PROCESS
 
Assoc. of American Colleges & Universities
  “Almost all of the institutions surveyed (89 percent) are in some
stage of either assessing or modifying their general education
program.  Assessment of cumulative learning outcomes in
general education is, in fact, now becoming the norm.”
   “Fifty-two percent of institutions are currently assessing
cumulative learning outcomes in general education beyond the
level of individual course grades, with another 42 percent
reporting that they are planning for assessment of cumulative
general education learning outcomes.”
AAC&U, 2009, Survey of 433 colleges and universities
Stages of the Assessment Process
1. Establishing Goals, Objectives, and/or
Outcomes
2. Selecting or Designing Methods
3. Collecting Credible Information
4. Analyzing and Maintaining Information
5. Using Information for Teaching and Learning
Improvement
*Regardless of the level of assessment required, whether it be
a single learning objective, a course, a curriculum, or an
entire  program, the process is the same.
Stages of the Assessment Process
Establishing
Objectives/ 
Outcomes
Selecting/
Designing
Instruments
Collecting
Information
Analyzing/
Maintaining
Information
Using
Information
Continuous Cycle
Student Learning Goals
SKILLS
 
1. Critical Thinking
 
2.Command of Language
     2a. Reading 
 
     2b. Writing
 
     2c. Speaking
 
     2d. Listening
 
3. Quantitative Literacy
 
4. Information Literacy
     4a. Library Use 
 
     4b. Computer Technology Use
5. Interpersonal Communication
 
 
 
DISPOSITIONS
 
1. Social Responsibility
2. Humane Values
 
3. Intellectual Curiosity
4. Aesthetic Values
 
5. Wellness
 
KNOWLEDGE
 
1. Breadth of Knowledge
     1a. Arts
 
     1b. Literature
 
     1c. Civilization
 
     1d. Global Issues
 
     1e. 2nd Culture or Language
     1f. Mathematics
 
     1g. Social and Behavioral Sciences
     1h. Biological and Physical Sciences
2. Interdependence among Disciplines
What are Student Learning Outcomes?
OUTCOMES
Specific knowledge, skills, or attitudes that students are
expected to achieve through their college experience
Describe observable behavior indicative of learning or
development
Student-centered!
Aligned with the GE goals and the program’s mission
  
S
pecific
 
M
easurable
 
A
ttainable
 
R
easonable
T
imely
Curriculum Mapping Example
Selecting/Designing Instruments
Direct measures are best
Assess the extent to which students have mastered
outcomes via:
Multiple-Choice Tests
Oral Presentations
On-Demand Essays
Course Embedded Essays
Portfolios
Locating Instruments
Student Learning Goals and Outcomes/Objectives create
the engine that drives assessment
Search for commercial instruments ($$)
ETS, Pearson, ACT, College Base, CLA
Search for non-commercial instruments
Check alignment with learning outcomes
Check measurement properties-reliability and validity
Selecting or Designing Instruments
Items and asks Must Match Objectives
Create your own blueprint
What is the Purpose of Assessment?
JMU Example of QR and SR
Start off trying to describe level of student learning
Move toward describing growth
Later establish faculty expectations for GE completers
What Type of Instruments?
Validating Inferences
undefined
Collecting Information
Start with an Important Question-
This will guide your data collection
Cross sectional design- to begin
Pre- and post-test- later
Very powerful; faculty love this design
Sampling vs. census data collection
Methodology will dictate—costs, resources
Course embedded
Where are the ‘natural homes’ for assessment?
Analyzing/Maintaining Information
Reliability has to come first
Validation of inferences is a natural partner for any
assessment question:
Do course grades correlate with performances?
Can we show evidence of course impact?
Do students that have completed GE requirements
perform better than entering students?
Are there differences by SU, AP or transfer credits?
Do students achieve faculty expectations?
Is there value-added?
Creating and Using Information
You need an infrastructure for
Sound data collection
Interpreting and creating good reports
Surprising results
Identifying strengths and weaknesses
Sharing results and improving processes
How can good data be used?
Improving assessment process and instruments
Improving teaching & learning
Academic program review
Strategic planning & budgeting
Fulton School Example: History
Used learning goals to develop a rubric that is used
to evaluate research papers
Rubric evaluates research, analytical and
communication abilities, in general,  and as they
relate to the study of history in particular.
Also assisted in providing essays for GE assessment
with the English department
Perdue School Example
Developed six to seven learning goals for both its
undergraduate and graduate programs.
Each goal has one or more measurable objectives.
As of Fall 2009, methods have been developed for assessing
each learning goal.
Team approach-each learning outcome assessed by faculty
members representing each discipline.
Based on data collection, the Perdue School has:
made changes to the Common Body of Knowledge Exam 
expanded professional development opportunities to include a 1
credit junior year course (BUAD 300) and a non-credit senior
year assessment (BUAD 400) to reinforce  our learning goals.
Henson School Example
Recent Assessment and Evaluation Activities with the
Henson School Science General Education
Requirements
2-IVA-Labs Courses
1-IVA or IVB Course (Non-lab) or IVC (Math or COSC)
Routine assessment for accredited programs (Nursing,
Respiratory Care, and Medical Lab Sciences)
Seidel School Example
Specialty Program Area Annual Report
What does data show?
What actions were taken based on this data?
How will assessment system change?
These reports have led to changes in
Curriculum-classroom management has been added to
SCED programs
Evaluation instruments-modified to better align with
program standards
 
Other assessment examples from your programs that
you would like to share?
Are any of you stuck at a particular phase in the
assessment process?
undefined
SALISBURY UNIVERSITY
ASSESSMENT PROGRESS
 
SU’s Assessment Progress
University Academic Assessment Committee
Established in 2002
Establishment of the Student Learning Goals
2000, General Education Task Force
2009-Present, Alignment with General Education Courses
Development of Student Learning Outcomes
June 2009-Present
General Education Assessment
Academic Profile/MAPP/Proficiency Profile-2005
Critical thinking, written communication, information literacy
ALEKS
Academic Program Review
Pilot revisions AY 2009-10
Academic Profile/MAPP/Proficiency
Profile 2005
*Values in parentheses represent average % of test-takers from other Master’s Level I & II institutions
.
Self Study Assessment Results-2006
APR Proposed Changes: 2009-10
Removal of General Education analysis
Removal of peer comparison
Data pre-populated in tables
Clarification & Training
Electronic creation and submission
Rubric-based feedback provided to programs
Reviewing assessment progress periodically
October review
3-year Assessment Plan & Summary Preview
Fulton School curriculum reform APR guidelines
Academic Program Review
PART I- Assessment Plan and Summary 
Program Description
Student Learning Goals, Outcomes, and/or Objectives
Assessment Method(s) 
Data Results and Use
Assessment Action Plan
PART II- Program Review and Action Plan
Internal Review and Qualitative Analysis
Summary
Program Curriculum and Advising
Resources
External Review Summary
Recommendations Action Plan
undefined
METHODS OF DATA
COLLECTION
 
Not Just Any Data Will Do…
If we want faculty to pay attention to the results, we
need credible evidence
To obtain credible evidence:
We need a representative sample or a census
We need good instrumentation
The tasks demanded must represent the content domain
Reliability and validity
We need students who are motivated to perform
Prerequisites for Quality Assessment
We must have three important components
Excellence in sampling of students
Either large, representative student samples or a census
Sound assessment instrumentation
Psychometrically sound assessment methods that map to the domain
Instruments and methods that faculty find meaningful
Motivated students to participate in assessment activities
Can we tell if students are motivated?
Can we influence examinee motivation?
Data Collection Methods
Course-Embedded
Grand Valley State University
Portfolios
College of William and Mary
George Mason University
Assessment Days
St. Mary’s University
Christopher Newport University
James Madison University
Assessment Season
Truman State University
Course-Embedded
Courses serve as data collection venue
Focused assignments are integral to courses;
evaluated as part of course grade using common
scoring procedure
Portfolios
Student developed vs. Instructor compiled
Contain samples that demonstrate attainment of
specific GE goals and outcomes
Rubric-based evaluation of samples
Assessment Days
Two institution-wide Assessment Days
Fall (August):
 Incoming freshmen tested at orientation
Spring (February):
 Students with 45-70 credits ; typically the sophomore year
Classes are cancelled on this day
All students are required to participate, else course registration is blocked
Students are randomly assigned to take a particular series of instruments
JMU just completed its 23
rd
 Spring Assessment Day
Spring Day is used by many majors to collect data on graduating seniors
Assessment Season
2-4 week testing window where instruments are
offered for completion
Students assigned to certain tests based on a
sampling approach
undefined
DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF
ASSESSMENT
 
The Assessment Culture at JMU
 
JMU requires students to take a series of student outcomes
assessments prior to their graduation. These assessments are held
at four stages of students’ academic careers:
as entering first-year students
at the mid-undergraduate point when they have earned 45 to 70 credit
hours, typically the sophomore year
as graduating seniors in their academic major(s)
Students will also complete an alumni survey after graduation
 
     
-JMU Undergraduate Catalog
The Assessment Culture at JMU
Long-standing and pervasive expectation at JMU
that assessment findings will guide decision-
making.
Annual reports, Assessment Progress Templates,
program change proposals, and all academic
program review self-study documents all require
substantial descriptions of how Assessment guides
decision-making
The Center for Assessment and Research Studies
(CARS) is the largest higher education assessment
center in the US
with 10 Faculty, 3 Support Staff, and about 15
Graduate Assistants at the Masters and PhD level
The Assessment Culture at JMU
CARS supports all general education assessment
CARS facilitates all JMU alumni surveys
CARS supports assessment for every academic
program
Undergraduate and Graduate
CARS supports assessment for the Division of
Student Affairs
All programs must collect and report on
assessment data annually
Academic Program Reviews are scheduled
Every 6 years for ALL academic degree programs
Every 5 years for General Education ‘clusters’
How do we develop a culture at SU?
Pathway for Institution-Wide Assessment Development
How assessment
can help meet
the mission &
what we want to
achieve with
assessment.
Measure well
what matters,
not what is easy
to count.
Unswerving
commitment that
withstands
economic
challenges &
changes in
leadership
Time and
monetary
resources are
investments to
ensure student
learning and
development
Institutional
committees with
faculty and
administrators to
inform process,
share, & use
findings.
Integration at all
stages to help
build a “culture
of evidence” to
inform &
strengthen
decisions
undefined
LUNCH
 
undefined
PROVOST
DR. DIANE ALLEN
 
undefined
GENERAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES WORK GROUPS:
1.  
CRITICAL THINKING
2.   COMMAND OF LANGUAGE-WRITING
3.   QUANTITATIVE LITERACY
4.   INFORMATION LITERACY- ACCESS INFORMATION
EFFICIENTLY, EVALUATE IT CRITICALLY, AND USE IT
APPROPRIATELY
5.   INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION
 
What’s Next?
1.
Provide draft GE outcomes to department chairs
and request feedback-February 2010
2.
Hold open faculty meeting to request feedback on
the draft GE outcomes-March/April 2010
3.
Present Faculty Senate with draft outcomes and
finalize outcomes for a vote-April 2010
4.
Use final GE outcomes & information provided at
the FDD roundtables to inform UAAC on the
development of an institution-wide GE assessment
process-Draft Plan-Fall 2010
Slide Note
Embed
Share

This event aims to discuss assessment misconceptions, best practices, the assessment process, faculty involvement, and feedback collection for General Education outcomes. Topics include crimes preventing a culture of assessment and strategies for rehabilitation.

  • Faculty development
  • Education assessment
  • Assessment misconceptions
  • Student achievement
  • Best practices

Uploaded on Feb 22, 2025 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT DAY GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT Donna Sundre, EdD Executive Director, Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS) Professor of Graduate Psychology James Madison University Kara Siegert, PhD Director University Analysis, Reporting, & Assessment Salisbury University January 21, 2010

  2. Purpose To encourage a discussion of common assessment misconceptions and description of the assessment process. The ultimate goals for the day are to: provide assessment resources and best practices, describe the assessment process, discuss the role SU faculty will play in developing the assessment process at the institution, and collect feedback from faculty on assessment strategies that they recommend for collecting data on student achievement of General Education outcomes

  3. ITINERARY 9:00-9:15- Introductions & Itinerary 9:15-10:00- Assessment Misconceptions 10:00-10:45-Assessment Process & Assessment at SU 10:45-11:30-Data Collection Methods 11:30-12:00-Developing a Culture of Assessment 12:00-12:30-Working Lunch-Wicomico Room 12:30-1:00- Provost Allen 1:00-1:30- Questions & Introduction to Afternoon Activity 1:30-3:00- Roundtables 3:00-4:00- Faculty Feedback

  4. CRIMES, MISDEMEANORS, AND FELONIES THAT PREVENT A CULTURE OF ASSESSMENT

  5. Crime, Consequence, and Rehabilitation Crime: Practice (or non-practice) that results in the breakdown of the assessment process Consequence: How the crime affects your assessment program Rehabilitation: How to fix the offending behavior Of course there are different levels of offenses; we ve divided our examples into misdemeanors and felonies

  6. Crime: Focus only on Weaknesses Level: Misdemeanor I Consequence: Faculty and administrators complain that assessment focuses on faults Rehabilitation: Look specifically for strengths, report and publicize them; provide balanced feedback

  7. Crime: Use of Unnecessary Jargon Level: Misdemeanor I Consequence: Rolling Eyes (i.e., a lack of interest and, worse, a lack of understanding of results) Rehabilitation: Know your audience. Present at their level. Complex analyses are often useful and appropriate, but offer these in an appendix, technical report, or talk to someone after the meeting.

  8. Crime: GE and the assessment of GE goals and outcomes are the responsibility of the faculty that teach GE only Level: Misdemeanor I Consequence: Faculty teaching in non-General Education courses will disengage with General Education conversations Rehabilitation: GE includes the most fundamental skills and is therefore taught across all courses, majors, and faculty. Faculty from all disciplines should play a role in developing GE assessments.

  9. Crime: Using Course Grades as Evidence of Student Learning Level: Misdemeanor II Consequence: Specific conclusions about student learning and achievement of student learning outcomes cannot be determined making it difficult to close the loop Rehabilitation: Develop assessment methods and evaluation strategies that are directly aligned with learning outcomes

  10. Crime : Forgetting that All Research has Limitations Level: Misdemeanor II Consequence: Faculty will question whether results are indicative of students true ability because Student aren t motivated Sample was too small Test/Instrument isn t perfect We need more analyses, data, etc Rehabilitation: Use the assessment process and results to improve and inform the process. There will always be factors outside of our control. The key is appropriate interpretation of results; faculty should guide this.

  11. Crime: Only Recommending Multiple-Choice Tests for Assessment Level: Misdemeanor III Consequence: Skeptical faculty and administrators. They are more likely to question the validity of the data. Rehabilitation: Use the Student Learning Goals and outcomes to determine the most appropriate method of data collection.

  12. Crime: Surprise Stakeholders with Poor Results Level: Misdemeanor III Consequence: Defensive faculty and administrators. They are more likely to try to undermine assessment efforts. Rehabilitation: Share poor results informally with stakeholders first. Have them brainstorm why results turned out so. Include them in presentations.

  13. Crime: Assessment Reports Collect Dust Level: Felony Consequence: Faculty will consider assessment a bureaucratic exercise invented by administrators and government for the sole purpose of torturing them. Rehabilitation: Make sure time and resources are allotted for faculty to consider and use assessment results.

  14. Crime: Assessment Data Reported at the Individual Faculty Level Level: Felony (Capital Offense) Consequence: Audit mode confirmed; faculty assume results are being use to assess them, not programs. Expect mass hysteria and mutiny. Rehabilitation: There may be none. Administration will need to earn respect. Allow faculty to interpret findings and suggest improvements.

  15. Things to Consider You already do assessment! Systematic basis for making inferences about student development and growth Think about why you go to work everyday your purpose Do you see your students as your partners in learning? What feedback from your partners would be most beneficial for program improvement?

  16. Final Questions What assessment crimes have you seen committed here or at other institutions? What assessment crimes are you most concerned might take place at SU? How can we best assure that these misdemeanors and felonies are not committed at SU? Other Questions, Comments, or Concerns?

  17. ASSESSMENT PROCESS

  18. Assoc. of American Colleges & Universities Almost all of the institutions surveyed (89 percent) are in some stage of either assessing or modifying their general education program. Assessment of cumulative learning outcomes in general education is, in fact, now becoming the norm. Fifty-two percent of institutions are currently assessing cumulative learning outcomes in general education beyond the level of individual course grades, with another 42 percent reporting that they are planning for assessment of cumulative general education learning outcomes. AAC&U, 2009, Survey of 433 colleges and universities

  19. Stages of the Assessment Process 1. Establishing Goals, Objectives, and/or Outcomes 2. Selecting or Designing Methods 3. Collecting Credible Information 4. Analyzing and Maintaining Information 5. Using Information for Teaching and Learning Improvement *Regardless of the level of assessment required, whether it be a single learning objective, a course, a curriculum, or an entire program, the process is the same.

  20. Stages of the Assessment Process Establishing Objectives/ Outcomes Using Information Selecting/ Designing Instruments Continuous Cycle Analyzing/ Maintaining Information Collecting Information

  21. Student Learning Goals SKILLS 1. Critical Thinking 2.Command of Language 2a. Reading 2b. Writing 2c. Speaking 2d. Listening 3. Quantitative Literacy 4. Information Literacy 4a. Library Use 4b. Computer Technology Use 5. Interpersonal Communication KNOWLEDGE 1. Breadth of Knowledge 1a. Arts 1b. Literature 1c. Civilization 1d. Global Issues 1e. 2nd Culture or Language 1f. Mathematics 1g. Social and Behavioral Sciences 1h. Biological and Physical Sciences 2. Interdependence among Disciplines DISPOSITIONS 1. Social Responsibility 2. Humane Values 3. Intellectual Curiosity 4. Aesthetic Values 5. Wellness

  22. What are Student Learning Outcomes? OUTCOMES Specific knowledge, skills, or attitudes that students are expected to achieve through their college experience Describe observable behavior indicative of learning or development Student-centered! Aligned with the GE goals and the program s mission SpecificMeasurableAttainableReasonable Timely

  23. Curriculum Mapping Example GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING GOALS General Education Student Learning Goals RATING- Rate the level of importance of each outcome OUTCOMES- Specific knowledge or skills students develop through their college experience GEN ED AREA(S)- General Education Sub-group areas that provide courses for students to attain the identified outcome SKILLS- 1. Critical Thinking 3 Assess strengths and weaknesses of arguments in essays written for general audiences. Compose well-reasoned and argued responses to arguments. Sythesize and apply informaton and ideas from readings across disciplines IIA, IIB, IVB, IVC 1 IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, IVC, V 4 IA, IB

  24. Selecting/Designing Instruments Direct measures are best Assess the extent to which students have mastered outcomes via: Multiple-Choice Tests Oral Presentations On-Demand Essays Typically use some combination Course Embedded Essays Portfolios

  25. Locating Instruments Student Learning Goals and Outcomes/Objectives create the engine that drives assessment Search for commercial instruments ($$) ETS, Pearson, ACT, College Base, CLA Search for non-commercial instruments Check alignment with learning outcomes Check measurement properties-reliability and validity

  26. Selecting or Designing Instruments Items and asks Must Match Objectives Create your own blueprint What is the Purpose of Assessment? JMU Example of QR and SR Start off trying to describe level of student learning Move toward describing growth Later establish faculty expectations for GE completers What Type of Instruments? Validating Inferences

  27. Item(s) Assessing Objective 2, 5, 9, 14, 18, 28, 38-41, 55-57 (13 items; 19.7% of test) Cluster 3 - Learning Objectives Scores 1. Describe the methods of inquiry that lead to mathematical truth and scientific knowledge and be able to distinguish science from pseudo- science. M = 9.25 (71% correct) SD = 1.77 = .35 17, 20, 22, 27, 64-66 (7 items; 10.6% of test) M = 4.61 (66% correct) SD = 1.46 = .32 2. Use theories and models as unifying principles that help us understand natural phenomena and make predictions. 1, 15, 16, 43-46 (7 items; 10.6% of test) M = 4.51 (64% correct) SD = 1.61 = .49 3. Recognize the interdependence of applied research, basic research, and technology, and how they affect society. 2, 19, 24-26, 29, 55-57 (9 items; 13.6% of test) M = 6.47 (72% correct) SD = 1.29 = .23 4. Illustrate the interdependence between developments in science and social and ethical issues. 4, 7, 8, 10-13, 21, 30-33, 51-53, 58- 63 (21 items; 31.8% of test) M = 13.74 (65% correct) SD = 3.06 = .59 5. Use graphical, symbolic, and numerical methods to analyze, organize, and interpret natural phenomenon. 3, 34-37, 53, 60-63 (10 items; 15.2% of test) M = 5.93 (59% correct) SD = 1.77 = .44 6. Discriminate between association and causation, and identify the types of evidence used to establish causation 5, 6, 9-13, 18, 23, 28, 41, 42, 47-50, 54, 59, 60, 62, 63 (21 items; 31.8% of test) M = 15.10 (72% correct) SD = 2.74 = .55 7. Formulate hypotheses, identify relevant variables, and design experiments to test hypotheses. 2, 14, 24-26, 29, 38-40, 60-63 (13 items; 19.7% of test) M = 7.96 (61% correct) SD = 1.77 = .29 8. Evaluate the credibility, use, and misuse of scientific and mathematical information in scientific developments and public-policy issues. 3, 4, 7, 8, 10-13, 21, 30-37, 51-53, 58-63 (26 items; 39.4% of test) M = 17.58 (68% correct) SD = 3.63 = .65 Quantitative Reasoning M = 46.59 (70% correct) SD = 7.34 = .78 Total Test 1-66

  28. Collecting Information Start with an Important Question- This will guide your data collection Cross sectional design- to begin Pre- and post-test- later Very powerful; faculty love this design Sampling vs. census data collection Methodology will dictate costs, resources Course embedded Where are the natural homes for assessment?

  29. Analyzing/Maintaining Information Reliability has to come first Validation of inferences is a natural partner for any assessment question: Do course grades correlate with performances? Can we show evidence of course impact? Do students that have completed GE requirements perform better than entering students? Are there differences by SU, AP or transfer credits? Do students achieve faculty expectations? Is there value-added?

  30. Creating and Using Information You need an infrastructure for Sound data collection Interpreting and creating good reports Surprising results Identifying strengths and weaknesses Sharing results and improving processes How can good data be used? Improving assessment process and instruments Improving teaching & learning Academic program review Strategic planning & budgeting

  31. Fulton School Example: History Used learning goals to develop a rubric that is used to evaluate research papers Rubric evaluates research, analytical and communication abilities, in general, and as they relate to the study of history in particular. Also assisted in providing essays for GE assessment with the English department

  32. Perdue School Example Developed six to seven learning goals for both its undergraduate and graduate programs. Each goal has one or more measurable objectives. As of Fall 2009, methods have been developed for assessing each learning goal. Team approach-each learning outcome assessed by faculty members representing each discipline. Based on data collection, the Perdue School has: made changes to the Common Body of Knowledge Exam expanded professional development opportunities to include a 1 credit junior year course (BUAD 300) and a non-credit senior year assessment (BUAD 400) to reinforce our learning goals.

  33. Henson School Example Recent Assessment and Evaluation Activities with the Henson School Science General Education Requirements 2-IVA-Labs Courses 1-IVA or IVB Course (Non-lab) or IVC (Math or COSC) Routine assessment for accredited programs (Nursing, Respiratory Care, and Medical Lab Sciences)

  34. Seidel School Example Specialty Program Area Annual Report What does data show? What actions were taken based on this data? How will assessment system change? These reports have led to changes in Curriculum-classroom management has been added to SCED programs Evaluation instruments-modified to better align with program standards

  35. Other assessment examples from your programs that you would like to share? Are any of you stuck at a particular phase in the assessment process?

  36. SALISBURY UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT PROGRESS

  37. SUs Assessment Progress University Academic Assessment Committee Established in 2002 Establishment of the Student Learning Goals 2000, General Education Task Force 2009-Present, Alignment with General Education Courses Development of Student Learning Outcomes June 2009-Present General Education Assessment Academic Profile/MAPP/Proficiency Profile-2005 Critical thinking, written communication, information literacy ALEKS Academic Program Review Pilot revisions AY 2009-10

  38. Academic Profile/MAPP/Proficiency Profile 2005 PROFICIENCY CLASSIFICATION SKILL DIMENSION PROFICIENT MARGINAL NOT PROFICIENT Reading Level 1 70% (66%) 21% (20%) 8% (13%) Reading Level 2 41% (33%) 21% (22%) 38%(45%) Critical Thinking 7% (4%) 26% (13%) 67% (83%) Writing Level 1 80% (68%) 16% (23%) 4% (9%) Writing Level 2 30% (19%) 45% (38%) 25% (43%) Writing Level 3 12% (8%) 36% (28%) 52% (64%) Math Level 1 75% (56%) 21% (28%) 3% (16%) Math Level 2 48% (27%) 25% (30%) 27% (43%) Math Level 3 17% (6%) 22% (16%) 61% (78%) *Values in parentheses represent average % of test-takers from other Master s Level I & II institutions.

  39. Self Study Assessment Results-2006 Oral / written communication Direct measures Indirect measures Alumni survey English 101 and 102 scoring rubric/department assessment goals; assessments in individual courses ETS (pilot project); some department assessment goals; assessments in individual courses Departmental assessments for majors; assessments in individual courses Dept assessment goals; individual course assessments NSSE Scientific and quantitative reasoning Alumni survey NSSE Alumni survey Technological uses in the major Information literacy Alumni survey: NSSE Alumni survey Critical analysis and reasoning ETS (pilot project); some department assessment goals NSSE Assessments in individual courses CIRP

  40. APR Proposed Changes: 2009-10 Removal of General Education analysis Removal of peer comparison Data pre-populated in tables Clarification & Training Electronic creation and submission Rubric-based feedback provided to programs Reviewing assessment progress periodically October review 3-year Assessment Plan & Summary Preview Fulton School curriculum reform APR guidelines

  41. Academic Program Review PART I- Assessment Plan and Summary Program Description Student Learning Goals, Outcomes, and/or Objectives Assessment Method(s) Data Results and Use Assessment Action Plan PART II- Program Review and Action Plan Internal Review and Qualitative Analysis Summary Program Curriculum and Advising Resources External Review Summary Recommendations Action Plan

  42. METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

  43. Not Just Any Data Will Do If we want faculty to pay attention to the results, we need credible evidence To obtain credible evidence: We need a representative sample or a census We need good instrumentation The tasks demanded must represent the content domain Reliability and validity We need students who are motivated to perform

  44. Prerequisites for Quality Assessment We must have three important components Excellence in sampling of students Either large, representative student samples or a census Sound assessment instrumentation Psychometrically sound assessment methods that map to the domain Instruments and methods that faculty find meaningful Motivated students to participate in assessment activities Can we tell if students are motivated? Can we influence examinee motivation?

  45. Data Collection Methods Course-Embedded Grand Valley State University Portfolios College of William and Mary George Mason University Assessment Days St. Mary s University Christopher Newport University James Madison University Assessment Season Truman State University

  46. Course-Embedded Courses serve as data collection venue Focused assignments are integral to courses; evaluated as part of course grade using common scoring procedure ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Requires no extra collection period Requires course time intrusive, hard to implement well Increased student motivation Requires sound sampling plan Reduced costs Requires common assignment and scoring across multiple courses Faculty-driven Requires additional faculty scoring

  47. Portfolios Student developed vs. Instructor compiled Contain samples that demonstrate attainment of specific GE goals and outcomes Rubric-based evaluation of samples ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Can be used to evaluate improvement Scoring can be time consuming Can evaluate more complex, process- oriented skills Evaluation method must be explicitly stated to ensure proper evidence is provided

  48. Assessment Days Two institution-wide Assessment Days Fall (August): Incoming freshmen tested at orientation Spring (February): Students with 45-70 credits ; typically the sophomore year Classes are cancelled on this day All students are required to participate, else course registration is blocked Students are randomly assigned to take a particular series of instruments JMU just completed its 23rd Spring Assessment Day Spring Day is used by many majors to collect data on graduating seniors ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Data collection requires no course time Consider examinee motivation Makes assessment an institution-wide commitment; improves greatly over time Requires institutional commitment; faculty will react poorly at first Creates a culture of assessment Additional costs for proctors or faculty

  49. Assessment Season 2-4 week testing window where instruments are offered for completion Students assigned to certain tests based on a sampling approach ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES No course time required Motivation needs to be examined Allows for an extended evaluation period Additional cost to proctor exams Makes assessment an institution-wide commitment Requires students to attend session outside of classroom time

  50. DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF ASSESSMENT

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#