![]() |
|
|
Busy Chairperson's Guide to Assessment Written by Dr. Dennis Holt 1. What is a departmental assessment program? While
the list of educational objectives should be comprehensive and detailed,
it should still be feasible to assess every stated objective. Formulate
each
objective so that there is a credible connection between the objective and
the method of assessing it. Students will engage in assessment activities
that are an integral, logical part of their education. In any case, since
voluntary
participation is highly unlikely to produce satisfactory levels of student
involvement, both the benefits of participating and the costs of abstaining
need to be made evident to the students in terms that make sense to them. Popular alternatives to the
nationally normed exam are locally developed exams and performance-based
assessments (a
capstone project or a portfolio, such as the senior project in Geosciences
or senior recital in Music). Locally developed exams are scored "objectively." Performance-based
assessments typically use a criterion-referenced rating system. Indirect
measures include surveys, exit interviews, retention and transfer rates,
length
of time to degree, SAT and ACT scores, graduation rates, and placement
and acceptance data. Grade point averages, grades in the major, faculty/student
ratios, curriculum review documents, accreditation reports, demographic
data,
and other administrative data are not acceptable measures of student
outcomes. Departments are especially encouraged
to use several measures for one objective; skill in writing, for
example, might
be measured by performance on the University’s writing test,
performance on the program’s capstone project, and grades of
the department’s
majors compared with other students in English composition. The national model is Alverno College, where students
are assessed continuously throughout their college careers. More fundamental
than demonstrating growth,
however, is the need to measure student achievement against clearly
stated standards. Though it is quite difficult to demonstrate that
a department’s programs
are the primary contributor to student learning, it is less difficult
to show that students are completing the department’s programs
having reached an acceptable level of achievement relative to specific
educational objectives. Departments with licensure exams might want to state that no fewer than 95% of its students will pass the exam on the first attempt. And departments with a criterion-referenced capstone project (or internship evaluations based on specified criteria) might want to state that all students will receive at least a satisfactory score in each criterial area with 30% performing at a level higher than satisfactory. Performance-based assessments present specific problems. Though standards are usually written into scoring criteria, performance-based assessments have little credibility unless results are analyzed by comparison to performance of students outside the department, by external review, or through conscientious discussion among faculty of the relative strengths and weaknesses of student performance. The
Art Department’s evaluation of senior projects is strengthened
by the fact that it employs an external judge, as is the evaluation
of a department
that identifies areas of weakness indicated by particular measures (for
example, relatively weak understanding of the hypothetical method as
indicated by performance
in the senior portfolio) and proposes actions to strengthen them (for example,
holding a department faculty workshop on teaching the hypothetical method).
Whatever your approach, remember that statements such as "All graduating
students passed the department’s exit exam" are not credible
indicators of standards unless supplemented with appropriate analysis,
interpretation
and follow-up.
17. Do I have to use the results of assessment for the purpose
of improvement? The UARC hopes to see a significant increase in the number of departments using assessment for improvement, and if there are any efforts to improve departmental programs connected with assessment they should be reported. Reports of efforts to improve programs are telling indicators of a vital, ongoing assessment program. If your assessment program is not giving you useful information for program improvement, then this information (that the information is not useful) should be used to improve your assessment program. By a curious twist of logic, useless information thereby becomes useful. Written by Dr. Dennis Holt, Vice Provost |
||||||||||||
| Dakota Wesleyan University 1200 W. University Ave Mitchell, SD 57301 800-333-8506 |
||