In this second post on Assessment, I will first state and then comment on a set of six guide questions put forth by the HLC. These can serve as discussion points in thinking about the place and value of assessment at Cedarville. In the last part of this blog, I will feature a very important part of the assessment process: staff and department assessment.
Question 1: How are your stated student learning outcomes appropriate to your mission, programs, degrees, and students?
Comment: Every syllabus has a set of “Student Learning Outcomes,” often stated as “Course Objectives.” These are a set of goals that should be reached by every student upon completion of the course. Every new course that is proposed must show how the Course Objectives map to the Program Objectives (COMPO) and how the Program Objectives map to the Portrait Statements (POMPS). Although the Portrait Statements are not part of the Mission Statement, they are closely aligned with it, describing the characteristics of the Cedarville University graduate. This procedure assures a close alignment of the student learning outcomes of every course with the Mission Statement. The analysis of the assessment data of the student learning outcomes is a critical piece of our Assurance Argument, both in Criterion #1: Mission and Criterion #4: Teaching and Learning/Evaluation and Improvement. We must show how our student learning outcomes support our overall mission and how they inform ongoing improvement of our programs.
Question 2: What evidence do you have that students achieve your stated learning outcomes?
Comment: Although our Program Objective Assessment Plans and Results collect data from freshman and senior level assignments and further focus on Writing, Speaking, and Critical Thinking (described in the previous post), we should regularly be assessing the student learning outcomes from all of our courses. Whether this is done at the individual, program, or department levels is not prescribed, but it is important that we consider assessment data in all courses and use them as agents for continual improvement.
Question 3: In what ways do you analyze and use evidence of student learning?
Comment: I believe this is where the rubber hits the road. Once a semester is over and grades are posted, how many of us revisit the exams, papers, and other assessment tools to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of our teaching in producing the level of student learning in our stated objectives? Yet this is an important process emphasized by HLC that will assure that we are an institution that cares about continuous quality improvement. Our Assurance Argument for Criterion #4: Teaching and Learning/Evaluation and Improvement needs to show adequate evidence of HOW we are using assessment data to improve student learning.
Question 4: How do you ensure shared responsibility for student learning and for assessment of student learning?
Comment: HLC will look for evidence that assessment analysis is carried out by the cooperative efforts of many, both in academic and staff divisions. At the department level, a committee or group, if not everyone, should be aware and involved in assessment processes. Some departments have designated Assessment Days devoted to disseminating data analysis to every member. The Accreditation and Assessment Services is one area that collects and analyzes assessment data from every academic department, thus providing opportunities for a broader understanding of learning outcomes. Every area may collect and analyze assessment data in different ways, but the best guarantee of shared responsibility is having many eyes and minds coming together to decide how to use the results.
Question 5: How do you evaluate and improve the effectiveness of your efforts to assess and improve student learning?
Comment: This question asks not only about assessment, but about our efforts to improve the means or methods of assessment data collection. Improvements in student learning need to be data-driven, and the means of collecting the data also need to be examined and improved in order to have the most reliable and useful data.
Question 6: In what ways do you inform the public and other stakeholders about what students are learning and how well?
Comment: This is another area that needs some concentrated efforts to make our assessment results available to the public. Although some departments have alumni spotlight pages and the Career Center posts job placement statistics for alumni, we need to improve communication with the public about our current students are learning.
The Steering Committee and Criteria Sub-committees are currently writing the first drafts of the Assurance Argument. Questions such as the six discussed above are ones that we are asking ourselves as we think more broadly and deeply about the issues we face.
Although assessment of student learning outcomes is a central focus of the Assurance Argument, assessment is by no means limited to the academic area. All areas of the university’s operations—staff, academic, support services, student life, Christian ministries, undergraduate and graduate programs—require a means of assessment and assessment analysis in order to achieve excellence and continually improve. Jon Wood, Vice President for Student Life and Christian Ministries, provides an excellent example of staff assessment. Since coming to Cedarville, he has required annual goals for each of the departments in the Division of Student Life and Christian Ministries. In line with the Student Life and Christian Ministries Mission Statement, Student Life and Christian Ministries Core Values, and Student Life and Christian Ministries Core Outcomes, each department must be governed by its own Mission Statement and Department Goals. Each of these goals must have at least two criteria for success with each of these having at least two methods of assessment. An annual assessment report must be completed at the end of the assessment period. The report must discuss the findings that resulted from the assessment activities and most importantly, must discuss the use of the results. In other words, what changes were made based on the data? This process and analysis of the results to effect change are excellent examples of the emphasis on “analyzing and using evidence” (Question 3), “shared responsibility (Question 4), and “evaluating and improving effectiveness” (Question 5) that were discussed in the first part of this post.
All questions quoted from “Student Learning, Assessment, and Accreditation,” The Higher Learning Commission, 2007.
Posted in: Uncategorized