1. December 9, 2010 Laura A. Bayless, PhD Dean of Students St. Mary’s College of Maryland

2. Participants will be able to: ◦ Use assessment evidence for program improvement and documenting institutional effectiveness ◦ Identify and involve stakeholders ◦ Articulate and align goals and outcomes ◦ Describe a comprehensive assessment plan ◦ Identify multiple methods for assessment ◦ Explain how to assess an assessment plan 2

3.  Discuss elements that Middle States accreditors will be looking for  Elements are best practices – not just accreditation expectations  Need to document AND use evidence of student learning and institutional effectiveness  Dual purpose of accreditation: accountability and improvement 3

4.  Assessment for accountability and improvement  Stakeholders involved  Goal and outcome articulation and alignment  Assessment is comprehensive, systematic, ongoing, cyclical  Appropriate assessment methods used  Assessment of assessment processes 4

5.  Student learning is what students should be able to do, know, or value  Student learning assessment is “the systematic collection of information about student learning, using the time, knowledge, expertise, and resources available, in order to inform decisions about how to improve learning.(Walvoord, Assessment Clear and Simple, p. 2) 5

6.  Institutional effectiveness answers the question “Is the institution fulfilling its mission and achieving its goals?” (Middle States’ Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education, p. 26) 6

7.  Since student learning is the heart of most college missions, the assessment of student learning is an essential component of the assessment of institutional effectiveness. (Middle States’ Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education, p. 27) 7

8.  What is the connection between mission, goals and outcomes? 8

9.  Document effectiveness  Describe how results were used to make improvements 9 assessment = effectiveness + improvement

10.  On the bus AND in the right seats ◦ Primary ◦ Secondary ◦ Tertiary  Along for the whole ride  Share results with appropriate stakeholders 10

11.  You coordinate a leadership program that meets once a week for a semester.  In small groups, brainstorm a list of stakeholders that you would involve in the assessment of this program. 11

12.  Goals and outcomes are clearly articulated ◦ All levels in the institution  Goals and outcomes aligned with institutional mission and goals  Goals and outcomes are aligned with student learning/development programs 12

13.  In small groups, identify 3-4 goals for the leadership program 13

14.  “Assessment isn’t an activity. It’s a state of mind.”  Integrated: connected to other program elements  Ongoing: not a one-time activity  Systematic: intentional and purposeful  Cyclical: results lead to more assessment 14

15.  Measures for outcomes are clearly defined  Existing data  Direct and indirect methods  Quantitative and qualitative methods  Multiple methods  All types of assessment ◦ Needs, satisfaction, outcome, dept. reviews, etc. 15

16.  Thinking about assessing the leadership program, in small groups brainstorm the following ◦ 1-2 types of existing data that could be used ◦ 3-4 other assessment methods that could be used 16

17.  Document achievement of mission, goals, and outcomes  Enhance teaching/learning  Inform decision-making, resource allocation, priority setting, and improve students’ educational experience  Close the loop! 17

18.  In your small groups, describe how you might use the results of the assessment of your leadership program. 18

19.  Were your outcomes clearly articulated?  Was the assessment process meant to demonstrate both accountability and improvement?  Were effectiveness and learning assessed?  Was there evidence needed that couldn’t be gathered from the methods used?  Was the evidence that was gathered useful?  Were all stakeholders involved appropriately?  What changes would we make to the assessment process next time? 19

20.  Comments, Questions, Observations? 20

21. 21