college of education & human development unit assessment system step 1: program-level
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome
The Unit Assessment System as a decision-making framework
The import of the changes we are implementing
Your leadership role The College’s expectations
Objectives
To provide an review of the Unit Assessment System
To review the “big picture” – how and why we are implementing the Unit Assessment System
To describe the annual time line for implementation of the system
To distribute and describe the Program Data Yearbooks
To describe the format and content of the annual program-level reports
The Big Picture
A little history: NCATE 2003 2013 Program-level experiences with SPAs and GMU’s
APR NCATE Unit Standard 2 What a focused visit means, and why we are
having one Since 2011
CEHD Reorganization Divisions API
Continuous improvement & core values Unit Assessment System & strategic decision
making for CI
What is the Unit Assessment System?
An integrated decision-making framework that involves multiple levels of decision making
Program
Division
College
What is the Unit Assessment System?
At the program level, APCs and program faculty review evidence in Data Yearbook to inform decisions related to improving candidate performance on standards
Program decisions and strategic goals inform Division Directors’ decisions related strategic goals, resources, staffing
The above informs the Executive Team and the Dean on decisions related to resource allocation, organizational structures and processes, and strategic goals and objectives adopted for the unit.
Time line for Unit Assessment System
February 4th: Data Yearbooks distributed
March 15th: APCs submit program reports
April 1st: Division Directors submit reports
May 6th: GSE faculty receive briefing on Executive Team decisions, next steps
May 15th: Executive Team final written summary; NCATE team begins Institutional Report
Activity: Using the Data Yearbook What questions would you like to answer
about your programs, based on a review of the following types of data?
Candidate information
Admissions data; Candidate demographics
Candidate performance data
Performance on key assessmentsPerformance disaggregated by location
Graduate & employer surveys
GMU graduate exit survey; CEHD exit survey (satisfaction); Graduate, employer follow-up
Internships Field supervisor qualifications; Field supervisor demographics; Field site characteristics
Faculty Faculty qualifications; Faculty demographics; Course evaluations (disaggregated by location, ft/adjunct)
Program accreditation State accreditation matrix; Standards alignment
Program review process
How well are candidates performing on each of your key assessments, across the calendar year?
How well are candidates performing on standards, across the calendar year?
What opportunities exist for continuous improvement of your program?
What objectives for improvement will you commit to as a program?
Components of the data yearbook For each category of evidence:
What is this evidence? Where did it come from? Suggested ways of using it
What might this evidence imply? What other evidence might you use to
triangulate?
An action research approach
Root cause analysis
Solution development
and action planning
Reflectivepractice and evaluation
Collaborative problem diagnosis
Candidate information
Admissions data: # of applicants, # accepted or denied admission, etc. Admissions is the “gateway” into your
program What do trends suggest?
Are you satisfied that your process yields desired outcomes?
Candidate demographics Snapshot of diversity represented among
candidates in your program
Assessment of candidate performance
Candidate performance on key assessments (by assessment “bin”) Are candidates in our program demonstrating
what they know and are able to do with consistency?
Are there specific standard elements on which candidates seem to excel, or to have difficulties?
What does data suggest about assessment processes?
Candidate performance disaggregated Data will be distributed in February
Candidate assessment of dispositions (2013)
Graduate and employer surveys Mason graduate exit survey (May 2012
grads) CEHD graduate exit survey
Satisfaction with various aspects of candidate experience at GMU and in your program
May help answer “why” questions CEHD graduate follow-up survey (2013) CEHD employer follow-up survey (2013)
Internship, field experiences
Internship/supervisor qualifications Internship/supervisor demographics
What are the characteristics of field supervisors?
How does this relate to the quality and diversity of field experiences?
Internship/field placement supervisor evaluations What do candidates say about supervision?
Internship/field placement site characteristics How diverse are placement sites?
Faculty information
Faculty qualifications (by f/t, p/t, adjunct) Does your program have a sufficient cadre of
highly qualified instructors? Faculty demographic characteristics
Are candidates taught by a diverse group of instructors?
Course evaluations (by on/off campus; f/t, p/t, adjunct) Do candidates perceive teaching to be high
quality? Course syllabus review
Report template
Part 1: Program goals What, if any, goals and objectives did your
program pursue during 2012? Part 2: Candidate performance
How well are candidates performing on each key assessment, across the calendar year?
How well are candidates performing on standards, across the calendar year?
What evidence did you consult to support your conclusions?
Report template
Part 3: Examination of program data What does candidate admissions and demographic
data tell you about the quality, quantity, and diversity of candidates?
What do candidate and employer surveys suggest about program efficacy? What, if any, areas represent a concern?
What does evidence related to internship and field experiences (if applicable) suggest about the quality, quantity, and diversity of placements?
What does evidence suggest about the quality, quantity, and diversity of faculty, including candidate evaluation of faculty teaching?
Report template
Part 4: Program improvement objectives What opportunities exist for improvement? What are your program’s long term (3-5 years)
and/or short term (1 year) goals and objectives? What resources do you need to accomplish
these? Part 5: CI: Program assessments
What have you done to study assessment consistency?
What have you found as a result? What changes have you made?
What the program report is…& is not
The program report is… Evidence of your program faculty’s
examination of data related to continuous improvement;
A conduit for your program to communicate its accomplishments, goals and resource needs
A means for division directors & deans to learn from you about your program
The program report is not… A repetition of the data presented in the
yearbook
Activity: What to do now?
How will you take this information back to program faculty? What is your action plan?
How will evidence in the Data Yearbook help you answer the questions you posed earlier?
Dates & times for support
Tuesday, February 26th, 1-2 pm PhD, PE, Ed Psych, IOT, LT
Tuesday, February 26th, 2-3 pm ELMS
Tuesday, March 5th, 11am-Noon SPED
Tuesday, March 5th, Noon-1pm APTDIE
PLUS – BY APPOINTMENT, IF NEEDED