1. From the IR Office To the Classroom: The Role of Assessment in Student Learning Dr. John W. Quinley Dr. Brett Parker

2. From IR Office To The Classroom Expansion of focus History of student outcomes assessment Rubric review project

3. Expansion from IR & Indirect to Classroom & Direct

4. “We talk a good fight about wanting to have excellent schools when in fact we’re content to have average ones.” Nation At Risk David Gardner “Nation At Risk” Commission Shift

5. Institutional Effectiveness Movement (indirect) Accreditation agencies National profession associations National taskforces State efforts Shift

6. Student Learning Outcomes Movement (direct) What the student – Knows – Can do – Values Appropriate Shift

7. Indirect: IR OfficeDirect: Faculty Where College objectives Outside classroom Embedded in curriculum Classroom What Surveys & focus groups Transcript analysis Papers Presentations Portfolios

8. Indirect: IR OfficeDirect: Faculty Audience Administrative Regulatory agencies Public Academic administration Faculty Regulatory agencies Students Purpose Broad policy Accountability to regulatory agencies Public relations Curriculum modification Instructional delivery Accountability to regulatory agencies Students

9. Push External mandates Administrative mandates Models, systematic approaches Shift

10. Model Develops frameworks Ties measures to core Reports, analyzes findings Uses findings Integrates plans

11. Structure Program Outcome Who will be assessed? When will they be assessed? What is the assessment approach? What is the measurement? Articulate the creative process & its influence on project development Students in ART 121, 131, 132 --------------------- Students in ART 141, 241 (sample of 5 students) At end of course -------------------- All assignments Oral critique Artist’s statement Written critique Rubric score

12. Faculty the Key to Success Involvement and meaning Decentralized responsibility with support Sustainability

13. “One of the distinguishing characteristics of successful assessment programs is the extent to which they engage faculty and others in the process.” Palomba & Banta, 1999

14. “In order to maintain buy-in and relevance to purposes, it is important to decentralize the day-to-day assessment work while providing central support to the process. Everyone should be held responsible for his or her role.” Keeton, 1998

15. “The weight of trying to assess too many learning outcomes…may unduly tax faculty and professional staff who will need to…integrate the process of learning about student learning into institutional rhythms and practices.” Maki, 2002 Morante, 2003 “While all areas should be assessed, “an institution that tries to define all areas equally, for whatever reason, is more likely to get bogged down in minutiae and overwork, increasing the likelihood of missing the improvement of student learning.”

16. Pull Discussion Encouragement, coaching Faculty led initiatives Professional development

17. 1. On scale of 1-5, where is your college On push? On pull? 2. Think of an experience with push or pull that you would be willing to share with the group. Engaging Faculty

18. History of Student Outcomes Assessment

19. Isothermal Experience Learning College Assessment Taskforce Learning outcome statements Criteria and rubrics Curriculum mapping Faculty quality improvement forms History

20. Learning College: To Improve Life Through Learning Creates substantive change Engages learners Provides options Collaborates in learning Defines instructors needs by student needs Supports learning by everyone Succeeds only when learning documented O’Banion, 1997 A Learning College Primer History

21. Assessment Taskforce Annual goals since 1998 Procedure, responsibility, purpose,& timeline Taskforce & college-wide meetings Hosts assessment authorities Professional development History

22. Communicate Effectively Through Writing… 1234 Adheres to rules in mechanics and style Varies sentence structure Uses standard English Uses language which is clear, concise and appropriate History

23. Curriculum Mapping General education statements – Criteria Individual class – Extent of emphasis (0,1,2) List major assignments/assessments History

24. General Education Competency and Rubric Review

25. General Education Competency Statements Communication Problems Interpersonal Quantitative Computer Culture

26. Originated from QEP development process 1. Form teams 2. Review using provided list of questions, survey current usage, examine literature 3. Revise 4. Test revisions with students and faculty 5. Present revisions to steering team & administration 6. Present to college-wide assessment meeting

27. Questions Content Scale Clarity and reliability Usability

28. Revisions introduced at a Rubrics Faire Reviewed rubrics highlighting any changes Provide examples of rubric use Sought input for additional revisions

29. QEP Update Notes from the chairs Faire Literature Assessment in support areas History and culture CCSSE

30. Results of process Changes were made to all but one rubric In almost all cases the content areas within a rubric were not changed

31. Considerable revision aimed at clarity; often leading to reduction of detail

32. Consistency of across rubrics – Language – Formatting

33. In all but one case, the 1-4 scale was maintained, although changes were made to the description of one scale

34. In summary, the process has … Shifted from indirect to direct measures Included both push & pull processes Arisen from sustainable and faculty driven efforts Involved students in various systems of assessment Engaged students in self- assessment

35. Resulted in meaningful data from many audiences Led to – Improved programs – Improved instruction – Improved student learning

36. Plans for next year include… Focus on two general education outcomes each year Workshops for faculty to improve information literacy understanding and use Speaker for interpersonal skills

37. From the IR Office To the Classroom: The Role of Assessment in Student Learning Dr. John W. Quinley Dr. Brett Parker Any questions or comments?