PEGGY MAKI , PH.D.EDUCATION CONSULTANT IN ASSESSING

STUDENT LEARNINGPRESENTED AT CCRISEPTEMBER 21 , 2012

Assessment at Three Levels: Institution, Program, and

Course or Educational Experience1

2

Foci

Integration of Institution-level Outcomes—Educated Person—into Program-level Outcomes and Course-level or Educational Experience Outcomes Inside and Outside of the Classroom

Alignment of Outcomes

3

Through Mapping, Articulation of:Where and How Students Learn andHow You Assess for Institution-level and

Program-level OutcomesDevelopment of a 3- 4-Year

Assessment Plan that Takes You Through Your Set of Outcomes until Your APR is Due

4

Development of Periodic Report Format Submitted to Peer Review Committee That Documents How You Have Changed or Innovated Pedagogy, Curricular Design, Instruction, and Educational Practices and When You Will Re-Assess to Determine the Efficacy of Your Changes

Development of Channels to Decision-making, Planning, and Resource Allocation—How the Institution Responds to Improving Student Learning

5

Integration of Institution-Level Outcomes: CCRI’s Educated Person Outcomes

Institution-level Outcomes (CCRI’s Educated Person Outcome)

Program- or Department-level Outcomes (including Educated Person Outcomes)

Course Outcomes/ Service Outcomes/Educational Opportunities Outcomes

(including Educated Person Outcomes)

6

21st Century: Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy

Knowledge

Understanding

ApplicationAnalysis

Evaluation

Creativity

7

Domains of Learning

Cognitive

Affective

Contexts for DemonstratingOutcomes

Psychomotor

8

Alignment of Program-level Outcomes with Institution-Level

OutcomesExample 1: (Focus on writing and speaking)

Institution Level Outcome: Students demonstrate critical thinking in their their written work and oral presentations across the curriculum and co-curriculum

Program-level Outcome: Students demonstrate critical thinking in a range of representative written documents in theater and a range of oral presentations

• Example 2: (Focus on Quantitative Reasoning) Institution-Level Outcome: Students solve problems

through quantitative reasoning in their work across the curriculum and co-curriculum.

Program-level Outcome: Students apply quantitative reasoning to a range of social science case studies, critical incidents, and interpretation of research

9

Examples

Analyze and evaluate philosophical arguments and positions (philosophy) Critical Thinking

Write documents for different audiences and purposes that focus on scientific and technical information (chemistry) Writing

Critically analyze and evaluate the merit of ideas and arguments (political science) Critical Thinking

Evaluate and discuss contemporary social and ethical issues related to biology and medicine (biology) Ethical Awareness

10

Purposes of Learning Outcome Statements

Orient Students to the College’s and each Program’s Expectations

Enable Students to Identify Where and How They Have Learned or Are Learning across the Institution

Position Students to Make Connections Between and Among Their Learning Experiences along Their Educational Journey

Lead to Collaborative Agreement about Direct and Indirect Methods to Assess Students’ Achievement of Outcomes

11

Program-level

Outcome

Course-level CT Outcome

Course Design to

Foster Outcome

Assignments that

Align with Outcome

Criteria and

Standards of

judgment

12

Course Outcomes

Assessment Methods and

Criteria of Judgment

Course Alignment for Outcomes

Course and Instructional

Design or Educational

Practices

13

Mapping: Where and How Students Learn

Helps us determine coherence among our educational practices that enables us, in turn, to design appropriate assessment methods (See sample map)

Identifies gaps in learning opportunities that may account for students’ level of achievement

Provides a visual representation of students’ journey

Helps students make meaning of the journey and hold them accountable for their learning over time

Helps students develop their own learning map

14

Mapping: How You Assess

Direct Methods, Including Some That Provide Descriptive Data

about Students’ Meaning- making Processes, Such as “Think Alouds”

Indirect Methods, Including Some That Provide Descriptive Data,

such as Small Group Instructional Design or SALG Survey

Institutional data (course taking patterns, for example)

15

Development of a 3-4-Year Assessment Plan

Develop a plan over 3-4 years that cycles through your program-level outcomes that also address your institution-level outcomes

Present an assessment plan for each year that documents:

16 The set of outcomes you will assess

A collaborative commitment to that set: Syllabi Audit or Curricular Map

Direct and Indirect Methods you will use to assess

Criteria and standards of judgment you apply to student work such as a scoring rubric

Your method of collecting student work and analyzing results

Ways you will engage colleagues in reviewing and acting on assessment results

17

Translate that plan into a report format that periodically explains how your collaborative discussion of results has informed your plans to revise or innovate pedagogy, curricular design, instructional design or educational practices across the curriculum. Changing only one course is likely not enough to foster enduring learning.

18

Channeling Results and Proposed Changes

Develop Communication Channels to Institutional Decision-making, Planning, and Allocation of Resources

Results should be considered in annual and long-range planning

Results may be prioritized by a receiving committee that funnels priorities to the Board