Transcript An Assessment Update

Assessment
at San Juan College
Presented to the
AQIP quality check-up Team
February 1, 2007
by
Andi Penner, chair, assessment committee
and
Lisa Wilson, Dean, School of Humanities
Assessment is the process
whereby we systematically
collect and analyze information
to understand and improve
student learning.
Assessment at SJC
A context for the conversation to follow:






AQIP Criterion 1
Common Student Learning Outcomes
(CSLOs)
Levels of Assessment
Artifacts
HLC Assessment Academy
NM State Task Force on Assessment
Reviewing the Orbit
or•bit n. definition 2. range or sphere of
action.
At SJC, we have long incorporated
classroom, course, and program
assessment of student learning
outcomes into our institutional
plan with the goal of improving
both teaching and learning.
AQIP has helped us focus
Assessment on Student Learning
AQIP Criterion One: Helping Students
Learn
1C1 What common student learning
outcomes do you hold for all students
(regardless of their status or program of
study), and what pattern of knowledge
and skills do you expect them to
possess upon completion of their
general and specialized studies?
A Brief History of Time
 Responding
to AQIP guidelines, a
workgroup met during summer
2003 to draft institutional learning
outcomes….
 In fall 2003, “Meeting of the Minds”
attendees made further draft
recommendations….
….cont’d
 Fall
2003: Quality Student Learning
Council and faculty refined the 5
Common Student Learning Outcomes.
 Jan.
2004: President approves
CSLOs.
 Fall
2004: CSLOs included in all
course syllabi and part of institutional
culture.
The World of CSLOs
SJC’s 5 Common Student Learning Outcomes
Learn
Students will actively and independently acquire, apply and
adapt skills and knowledge to develop expertise and a broader
understanding of the world as lifelong learners.
Think
Students will think analytically and creatively to explore ideas,
make connections, draw conclusions, and solve problems.
Communicate
Students will exchange ideas and information with clarity and
originality in multiple contexts.
Integrate
Students will demonstrate proficiency in the use of technologies
in the broadest sense related to their field of study.
Act
Students will act purposefully, reflectively, and respectfully in
diverse and complex environments.
Classroom Assessment
 Each
faculty member seeks to analyze his
or her teaching effectiveness, or to
measure student learning of specific
outcomes in a particular class.
 Typical methods include:
 CATs (Classroom Assessment Techniques)
• One-minute papers
• Muddiest point
 Response papers or “one-pagers”
 Quizzes
 Discussions
 Small Group Feedback
Course Assessment
 Faculty
(often the lead instructors) seek to
measure whether or not students across
sections of the same course are achieving
the stated outcomes.
 Typical





methods of assessment include:
Major papers or projects
Major speech or demonstration
Artwork or performance
Portfolios or exams
Capstone projects
Program Assessment
 Chairs,
program directors, coordinators,
and/or faculty measure whether students
have achieved the designated program
outcomes. Outcomes will have been
covered in a number of different courses
within the curriculum.

Typical methods of assessment include:




Licensure exams
Practicum capstone projects
Portfolios
Performance or demonstration
Institutional Assessment
 The Assessment
Committee is charged
with measuring student learning across
disciplines and programs to determine
whether we are ensuring that students
are completing programs, certificates, or
degrees while demonstrating their ability
to Learn, Think, Communicate, Integrate,
and Act.
 Should we use a “one-size-fits-all”
standardized exit exams or capstone
courses required of every student?
Assessing the CSLOs
CSLO Assessment at the Institutional level could
involve:
 Standardized
competency exit
exam for all students
 Capstone
project for all students
 Capstone
course required of all
students
 Or, Artifacts….
The Artifact Model
 After
reviewing the options, the SJC
Assessment Committee has selected
the artifact model of institutional
assessment.
 Using
artifacts for CSLO assessment
preserves our commitment to student
learning by recognizing and valuing
our institution’s “specific needs and
circumstances” (Seybert, 2004, p. 9).
The definition…
An Artifact* is any assignment-driven
student-produced work such as a project,
demonstration, speech, performance,
examination, or portfolio, that can be
assessed to determine student
achievement of one (or more) of the
CSLOs. It is a flexible approach to
institutional-level assessment.
*While the word artifact conveys different meanings in a variety of academic
disciplines, it has a specific meaning in the realm of assessment, not to be
confused with other denotations or connotations.
Advantages of the Artifact Model…
 The
process is “invisible” to students.
 The artifacts are often the same
assignments used for course and/or
program assessment.
 Faculty can “teach to the artifact.”
 We are measuring what we value: the
CSLOs.
 Many other institutions are using this
minimally intrusive model.
And the disadvantages…
 The Artifact
Model requires a
commitment on the part of faculty,
deans, assessment committee
members, and institutional
researchers to collect and assess
artifacts, analyze data, report
results, and make changes.
 It can be messy because it
involves multidisciplinary
responsibility.
Yearly Cycle:
A work in progress
We identify courses from which to select
artifacts, perhaps 100 total.
 Students, nearing program completion,
give permission for us to use their artifacts.
 The Assessment Committee (or faculty
assessment teams) assesses artifacts
using CLSO rubric(s).
 Results are entirely independent of an
instructor’s grading process.

No Black Hole Here
 Results
will be reported back to faculty,
Deans, & VPL.
 Results will not be used to evaluate
individual students or faculty members.
 Results will influence curriculum, course,
and program design.
 Results will demonstrate that we are
committed to improving student learning.
Current Atmospheric Conditions
 The Assessment
Committee (AC) has
twice piloted an Artifact Assessment:
ENGL 211 Portfolio and “THINK” rubric
 All 5 CSLO rubrics and several different
artifacts, with focused discussion on MATH
130.

 The AC
continues to educate the college
community and encourage assessment at
all levels.
The Extended Forecast

Baseline Assessment Inventory

L3 Initiative*: “Implement comprehensive
assessment processes to focus on Common
Student Learning Outcomes.” *SJC Operational Plan 20062010.

February 14, 2007 CTX Workshop:
Love♥ Assessment!.
We

Refine the college-wide process for
collecting, analyzing, and reporting Artifact
Assessment results.
On the Horizon:
Assessment Academy
 Send
a team of 5-8 faculty and staff to
the HLC Academy for Assessment of
Student Learning in June 2006.
 In
preparation, one to two members of
the June cohort will attend an
Information and Planning Workshop
in May 2006.
Assessment Academy, cont’d
 The Assessment Academy
is a 4-year
sequence of events focused on student
learning designed to accelerate and
advance assessment efforts.
 Our
goal: to create sustainable and
useful assessment practices with the
help of assessment experts.
Planetary Alignment:
The New Mexico State Higher Education
Department’s Assessment Task Force
 Since
March 2006, SJC has been
represented on the task force.
 Our
job is to recommend, to the
legislature, student learning outcomes
assessment strategies for the General
Education core competencies.
NM State Assessment Task Force,
cont’d
 The
HED will not dictate how
institutions do assessment.
 The
institutions want credible,
authentic, usable data derived
from assessment practices that
make sense with our programs.
NMHEAR, Feb. 22-23, 2007
 Penner
& Wilson on Task Force panel
“Finding our Focus: Assessing HED
General Education Competencies.”
 We
will present an overview of SJC’s
assessment plan & artifact model.
Pale Blue Dots
 Assessment
is crucial to
measuring our effectiveness at
Helping Students Learn.
 We
are committed to classroom,
course, program, and institutional
Assessment that makes sense,
and improves both teaching and
learning.
From Asteroid….
 Review
of challenges:
 Developing
effective and efficient
processes.
 Involving more people.
 Learning from other schools.
…to Zenith
 Questions?
 Comments?
Reference
Seybert, J. ( 2004). How to initiate an assessment
program. In T. W. Banta (Ed.), Community
college assessment (pp. 7-9). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.