Report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Assessment of Learning Outcomes by armedman1

VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 19

									Report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on
  Assessment of Learning Outcomes


                 N. John Cooper
                 Dean, School of Arts and Sciences &
                 College of General Studies
                 Convener, Ad Hoc Working Group on
                 Assessment of Learning Outcomes

                 Council of Deans
                 November 9, 2006
               Shared Values

 Commitment to excellence in instruction that
  spans regional campuses, professional schools,
  and liberal arts schools
 Commitment to importance of evaluating the
  outcomes of instructional programs
 Commitment to the use of outcome evaluations
  in strategic planning processes
Move to Implementation


                      Commitment to
Commitment             importance of
 to excellence         evaluating the
in instruction           outcomes of
                        instructional
                          programs

          Commitment to
             the use of
              outcome
           evaluations in
         strategic planning
              processes
Leads to Creation of New Culture




         Culture of
        Assessment
Processes of that Culture Must Be


                 Consistent with
                  University goals
                 Comprehensive
                 Documented
                 Meaningful to others
                 Sustainable
 To Be Consistent with University Goals

Each school’s and campus’ goals for student learning outcomes
must be consistent with the University’s goals for all of our
graduates, that they are able to:
  Think critically and analytically
  Gather and evaluate information effectively & appropriately
  Understand and apply basic, scientific, & quantitative
   reasoning
  Communicate clearly and effectively
  Use information technology appropriate to their discipline
  Exhibit mastery of their discipline
  Understand and appreciate diverse cultures
  Work effectively with others
  Have a sense of self, responsibility to others, and
   connectedness to the University
To Be Consistent with University Goals

 Assessment must be based on student learning
  outcomes
 As articulated by Middle States in Standard 14,
  Assessment of Student Learning:
    “Assessment of student learning demonstrates that
    the institution’s students have knowledge, skills,
    and competencies consistent with institutional
    goals and that students at graduation have
    achieved appropriate higher education goals.”
Faculty Must Be Engaged in Development
   of Learning Outcomes Assessment

Questions asked of Arts and Sciences Department Chairs
and Program Directors for 2006 Departmental Activity
Reports:
  What attributes, skills, and knowledge do you expect
   graduates in your major(s) to acquire that are
   characteristic of the discipline?
  What attributes, skills, and knowledge do you expect your
   graduates to acquire that are hallmarks of your program
   at Pitt?
  What qualitative and/or quantitative evidence can you
   collect on an ongoing basis to show how well your
   graduates are meeting these goals?
    Student Outcomes May Be Measured
                 Directly

   Course papers
   Course assignments
   Exhibits
   Performances
   National disciplinary exams
   Performance on licensure or professional exams
   Authentic assessments
    Student Outcomes May Be Measured
                Indirectly

   Job placements and placement rates
   Student surveys
   Graduate follow-up surveys
   Focus groups
   Exit interviews
Especially Rich Opportunities to Measure
            Student Outcomes

   Capstone courses
   Senior projects
   Undergraduate research projects
   Thesis/dissertation
   Internships
   Portfolios of work and reflections on that work
   Embedded questions in assignments
    /examinations in specific courses in the
    curriculum
       Approaches to Measurement of
                Outcomes

 Program faculty review
  assignments from
  capstone courses and
  assess how well the
  students have achieved
  desired outcomes
 Program faculty review approved dissertations and
  assess how well the students have achieved desired
  outcomes
 Faculty external to the course score embedded
  standardized questions
              To Be Comprehensive

Assessment processes expected for:
  All degree or certificate-granting programs listed in the
   graduate and undergraduate bulletins
  At a minimum each major at each degree level should
   be assessed, e.g.,
    • Associate of Science in Nursing
    • Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
    • Master of Arts in History
    • Doctor of Philosophy in English
    • MD, JD, MPPM, MAT, EdD, MSW
    • Etc.
  School- and campus-level general education curricula
               To Be Documented

Need Standard Minimal Components:
 An articulation of program mission/goals which reflects
  national disciplinary norms as well as any unique
  features of the University of Pittsburgh program
 Identification of three to five prioritized learning
  outcomes
 Identification of methods of assessment and
  determinations of when in the curriculum—and how—
  learning outcomes will be assessed
 Standards of comparison/targets for results of
  assessment
        To Be Meaningful to Ourselves
               and to Others

 Assessment must include
  direct evidence
 If a specific course is used,
  there must be periodic
  validation external to the
  course and instructor
 A process of faculty and
  administrative review that
  ensures results are used
  for program improvement
To Be Sustainable

          Must be respectful of
           faculty, administrative,
           and staff resources
             • Do not have to measure
               every outcome every year
               using every student
          Must be embedded in
           annual planning process
          Must be seen to drive
           change
  Distributed Responsibility Is Critical to
              Sustainability
 Program faculty are responsible for the development and
  administration of the assessment processes of individual
  programs in accordance with the appropriate programmatic
  or departmental governance structure
 Department chairs are responsible for coordinating the
  assessment process for departmentally-based programs;
  deans & campus presidents are responsible for school- and
  campus-based programs
 Schools & regional campuses are responsible for developing
  internal procedures for documenting program assessment
 Deans & campus presidents are to report annually to the
  Provost on their assessment activities and relevant results as
  part of their planning processes
Processes of a Culture of Assessment
               Must Be

                    Consistent with
                     University goals
                    Comprehensive
                    Documented
                    Meaningful to others
                    Sustainable
                    STARTED!
                Proposed Time Table

To ensure that we are prepared to report to our accrediting
agency, Middle States, in a timely manner:

 Deans & campus presidents will be asked to submit
  documentation of their assessment processes
     • for each degree program as part of their annual
       planning documents in March 2007
     • for general education programs as part of their
       annual planning documents in March 2008 if not
       embedded in degree program
 Initial assessments should be conducted and results reported
      • for each degree program in AY 2008
      • for general education programs in AY 2009 if not
        embedded in degree program

								
To top