Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research 2010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research Assessment Review Committee Report HCAS – Support/Foundations.

Παρουσίαση με θέμα: "Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research 2010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research Assessment Review Committee Report HCAS – Support/Foundations."— Μεταγράφημα παρουσίασης:

1 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research 2010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research Assessment Review Committee Report HCAS – Support/Foundations George Bailey June 4, 2014 1 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment, and Research

2 Mentoring/Review Process Established four coordinators to work with reviewers. Coordinators met together numerous times as needed. 10 faculty reviewed 8 centers, one office, two support programs, and 25 Foundations assessment units. The full committee met once for training. Reviews were conducted individually with assistance from coordinators as needed. 22013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

3 ARCS were rigorously trained. Initial training was provided by IPAR staff. 32010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

4 2012-13 Component Data DevelopingAcceptableProficient Outcome303242 Means of Assessment 443426 Criteria for Success 461937 Results403528 Actions Taken581432 Follow-Up to Actions Taken 512422 42013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

5 Data Visualization 52013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

6 2012-2013 Best Practices – Coordinators Receiving Feedback From ARCS 62010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

7 OUTCOME STATEMENTS OCCASIONALLY WERE CHALLENGING TO CRITIQUE– TYPICAL ARC COMMENT ‘Its Greek to me!”: Example Student Learning Outcome One: ο ὐ δένα πώποτε τ ῶ ν πολιτ ῶ ν, ὦ ἄ νδρες Ἀ θηνα ῖ οι, ο ὔ τε γραφ ὴ ν γραψάμενος ο ὔ τ ᾽ ἐ ν ε ὐ θύναις λυπήσας, ἀ λλ ᾽ ὡ ς ἔ γωγε νομίζω μέτριον ἐ μαυτ ὸ ν πρ ὸ ς ἕ καστα τούτων παρεσχηκώς, ὁ ρ ῶ ν δ ὲ τήν τε πόλιν μεγάλα βλαπτομένην ὑ π ὸ Τιμάρχου τουτου ὶ δημηγορο ῦ ντος παρ ὰ το ὺ ς νόμους, κα ὶ α ὐ τ ὸ ς ἰ δί ᾳ συκοφαντούμενος （ὃ ν δ ὲ τρόπον, προϊόντος ἐ πιδείξω το ῦ λόγου ）ο ὐ δέναπώποτετ ῶ νπολιτ ῶ ν ὦ ἄ νδρες Ἀ θηνα ῖ οιο ὔ τεγραφ ὴ νγραψάμενοςο ὔ τ ᾽ ἐ νε ὐ θύναιςλυπήσας ἀ λλ ᾽ ὡ ς ἔ γωγενομίζωμέτριον ἐ μαυτ ὸ νπρ ὸ ς ἕ καστα τούτωνπαρεσχηκώς ὁ ρ ῶ νδ ὲτήντεπόλινμεγάλαβλαπτομένην ὑ π ὸΤιμάρχου τουτου ὶδημηγορο ῦ ντοςπαρ ὰτο ὺ ςνόμουςκα ὶα ὐ τ ὸ ς ἰ δί ᾳσυκοφαντούμενοςὃ ν δ ὲτρόπονπροϊόντος ἐ πιδείξωτο ῦλόγου 72010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

8 Occasionally, ARCS founds “means of assessment” statements somewhat less than fully transparent: The General formula for Assessing Student Learning is as follows:-[ ( l / L) ^2] + [ ( v / C )^2 ] + [ ( a / A )^2 ] + ……… = One Measure of Improvement, where l is the ‘unit outcome’ that can be considered on a learning continuum and L is the maximum modulus that can be considered in that continuum, v is the rate of change of that outcome with respect to ‘demonstrated actions,’ namely, learning and C is the maximum modulus that can be considered in that continuum, a is the rate of change of learning with respect to ‘effort’ in that continuum and A is the maximum modulus fina/ly obtained by assessment. Generally, value l can be considered as an element of learning involving effort such that l = [( x ) ^2 + ( y ) ^2 + ( z ) ^2] ^0.5 82010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research This was addressed via one on one exchanges with UACS.

9 Exchanges generally were well received: 92010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

10 In some cases, medieval criteria for success wanted restatement in postmodern terms: 102010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

11 ARCS were able to get UACS to implement the necessary revisions, as illustrated below: An increase in student learning by one percentage point will prompt the unit to revise pedagogy or curriculum by more than one percent (specifically, by, the sum of the two coefficients obtained by the assessment method). Since the actual student learning success rate is (approximately) the nominal success rate minus deflation due to instructor variation, when inflation rises, the real success rate increases and student learning improves, and decreases otherwise. 112010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

12 The most challenging form taken by results reported is illustrated below: Results: Addressing this required creative thinking by ARCS: 122010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

13 Raising the dead: 132010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

14 Which finally brings us to the review of actions taken: 142010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

15 All in all, the team is happy that the format is revised for 2013-2014! 152010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

16 Rubric and Review Process Feedback Most helpful to reviewers was direct discussion with a coordinator. Coordinators benefited from regularly meeting together to be clear on the advice to give individual reviewers. The biggest difficulty was overcoming different views regarding what was OK and what was not. After coordinators identified a concern and decided on a response, this was communicated to the reviewer. All team members worked creatively to assist individual UACs to understand and make necessary improvements. 162013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research