DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
2001 - 2006
Valley City State University Assessment and
Institutional Effectiveness Plan
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Table of Contents
Page
I.
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
II.
VCSU’s Commitment to Assessment ................................................................................... 1
III.
The VCSU Assessment Program ...........................................................................................2
A. Defining Assessment
B.
Linking Assessment to the VCSU Mission
C.
Assessment Purpose and Goals
D. Scope of the Assessment Program
1. Assessing the Impact of Instructional Technology
2. Assessment and Program Reviews
E.
Assessment Program Guiding Principles
IV.
VCSU’s Ability-Based Assessment Model ...............................................................................5
A. The University Abilities and Skills
1. The Portfolio Assessment Requirement
B.
Implementation of the Abilities and Skills
1. Academic Program Assessment
2. General Education Assessment
V.
The Assessment Model ...........................................................................................................6
A. Assessment and the VCSU Institutional Effectiveness Model
B.
Unit/Program Assessment Cycle
C.
Institutional Assessment Cycle and Timelines (Under Development)
1. General Education Assessment Cycle
VI.
Assessment Program Administration and Structure (Under Development) .....................9
A. Evaluating Assessment Program Effectiveness
VII.
References ................................................................................................................................10
Appendices
A.
History of VCSU’s Assessment Program .................................................................................11
B.
Academic Program Review Template (Under Development) ................................................13
C.
AAHE “Principles of Good Practice For Assessing Student Learning” (AAHE, 1992) ..........14
D.
Academic Division Assessment Plans/Course-Ability Maps (Needed) ...................................16
1.
Communication Arts and Social Sciences
2.
Education and Psychology
3.
Fine Arts
(Need Standard Format)(~2 pages each)
4.
Business and CIS
5.
Health and Physical Education
6.
Mathematics and Science
E.
General Education Program Assessment (Under Development) ............................................28
F.
VCSU Institutional Effectiveness Plan (Proposed – see text) .................................................30
G.
Unit Assessment Plans (Other than Academic Divisions)(Proposed – See text) ....................32-41
1.
Student Affairs (under development)
2.
Academic Support Services
(Need Standard Format)(~2 pages each)
3.
Administrative Units (Need to specify individual units)
4.
Library/Electronic Information Resources
5.
Instructional Support
i
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
I. Introduction
This document describes the 2001 – 2006 Valley City State University (VCSU) Assessment Program and
how VCSU continues to demonstrate commitment to effective learning and teaching, that is, to realizing
its educational and other purposes. Based upon a thorough review of the current assessment literature as
well as the assessment activities of over 40 postsecondary institutions, this plan also updates the 19951996 VCSU Assessment Plan. Approved by the North Central Association (NCA), VCSU’s initial
assessment plan was developed during the 1991-1992 academic year.
The impetus for the update is based upon a variety of factors:
 The 1995-1996 plan has been largely implemented,
 The realization of the need to more clearly describe the relationships between the
different levels of assessment (institutional, program, classroom, non-instructional areas)
 To elucidate the relationship between the assessment of student academic achievement
and VCSU’s overall institutional effectiveness plan,
 To recognize and incorporate the impact of business services, the library, and
instructional/technical support on student outcomes,
 A recognition of the need for a clear and workable process for ensuring the integration of
all assessment activities with key institutional processes such as strategic planning,
budgeting, and resource allocation.
 2001 accreditation visits (NCA, NCATE).
The intended audiences for this document are VCSU faculty, students, and staff members as well as the
VCSU administration. Other audiences include, but are not limited to, external entities with express
interest in the health and success of VCSU, e.g., accreditation agencies (NCA, NCATE), and the North
Dakota State Board of Higher Education (SBHE).
II. VCSU’s Commitment to Assessment
As a student-centered institution of learning, VCSU is firmly committed to assessment, from the
assessment of academic achievement to the assessment of areas that support the academic endeavor, i.e.,
academic support services and student affairs. Other areas critical to student learning are the library and
VCSU’s instructional and technology support services and these areas are incorporated into the 20012006 VCSU Assessment Plan.
In the academic arena, assessment is viewed as an endeavor that belongs to the faculty. Faculty
leadership and commitment are critical to the success of VCSU’s assessment program and VCSU faculty
clearly demonstrate these qualities by their dedication to and passion for excellence in learning and
teaching. The Faculty are firmly supported by the VCSU administration, whose commitment to and
support of assessment is equally strong. In this community of learners, it is clearly recognized that
assessment is a campus-wide effort and that success of the assessment program –and the success of
VCSU in fully addressing its mission statement--is based upon the contributions of all.
Hence, VCSU’s commitment to student learning is primarily motivated by a deep concern for students
and for ensuring that they have the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to succeed both personally and
professionally. Clearly, the requirements of the North Central Association (NCA), embodied in Criteria
three and four, are also central to VCSU assessment efforts. By incorporating assessment data and
information into all campus activities, from curriculum development to strategic planning and budgeting
activities, VCSU ensures that precious resources are expended in ways that ensure students receive the
highest quality educational experience possible.
1
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
III. The VCSU Assessment Program
A. Defining Assessment
The VCSU student outcome assessment program began with the 1991 NCA requirement that all NCA
institutions develop and implement an assessment plan (see Appendix A for the history of the program).
However, the assessment of student academic achievement is not a new activity for VCSU faculty—a fact
that is often obscured by misunderstandings about the purposes and uses of assessment.
What is new is the focus on student learning first and how instruction supports learning. With
assessment, faculty members continue to evolve in their approach toward learning and instruction.
Although assessment does not require engaging activities that are completely new, assessment does
require a deliberate and public engagement in the “scholarship of teaching” (Boyer, 1993):
Assessment is “an on-going process aimed at understanding and improving student
learning. It involves making our expectations explicit and public; setting
appropriate criteria for high standards for learning quality; systematically
gathering, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to determine how well performance
matches those expectations and standards; and using the resulting information to
document, explain, and improve performance. When it is embedded effectively
within larger institutional systems, assessment can help us focus our collective
attention, examine our assumptions, and create a shared academic culture dedicated
to assuring and improving the quality of higher education (Angelo, Thomas,
November 1995, AAHE Bulletin, 48(3), pp. 7 – 9).
Institutional or academic program assessment reflects a summative assessment approach in which data
and information are collected to inform various constituencies about overall performance. Summative
assessment examples include final exams, program review reports, a final FIPSE grant report, or an NCA
self-study report. Conversely, formative assessment occurs when individual student performance or
program performance is matched to a preexisting criteria and feedback is given to improve performance.
Typically, feedback is given immediately in order to maximize learning. Students or programs can then
apply the learning to improve performance in tasks that are more summative in nature. Examples include
providing immediate feedback to theater students after a performance during class. Asking students to
identify the point that was most unclear during a class period and then reviewing that point during a
subsequent class is another example. Both types of assessment are included in this document.
B. Linking Assessment to the VCSU Mission
One of the most basic requirements for all assessment programs is to link all activities, whether
institutional or at the academic program level, to the institution’s mission statement. Hence, every unit on
campus has developed a mission statement and goals that are linked to the VCSU mission statement. In
addition, academic units and non-academic units that deal with student learning have developed student
learning outcomes linked to the VCSU mission:
Valley City State University is a learner centered community dedicated to continuing
improvement in meeting student needs. Preparing individuals to serve in a changing
world, the institution provides a quality educational experience in an innovative
culture and a technologically enhanced environment. A leader in the effective use of
instructional technologies, Valley City State University is a member of the North
Dakota University System and offers baccalaureate degrees in education, business,
and the liberal arts. (http://www.vcsu.edu/documents/mission.htm)
2
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
When determining how course or program goals link to the mission statement, consider how the levels of
assessment affect the nature of such linkages, i.e., whether the linkages are direct or indirect. The term
“levels of assessment” refers to the levels in an organization such as VCSU. Depending upon the higher
education institution, the levels vary. For VCSU, the possible levels (in descending order) are: SBHE,
Institution, division, department/program, and the individual course. The higher the level, the greater the
likelihood that goals and the accompanying student outcomes will be directly related to the VCSU
mission. At the course level, the student outcomes will be directly related to program goals and student
learning outcomes and more indirectly related to the University mission.
C. Assessment Purpose and Goals
The purpose of the VCSU Assessment program is enhance VCSU’s institutional effectiveness, i.e.,
assessment will allow VCSU to answer the question: to what degree does VCSU fulfill the various
aspects of its mission statement? More specifically, to what degree are students learning what is intended
by program/institutional goals and outcomes?
The primary focus rests on the assessment of student academic achievement but also includes the
assessment of the student learning that occurs outside of the classroom (student affairs) and well as
programs and services designed to support students during their VCSU career (academic support services,
administrative units, the University Library, and Instructional Support Services). Each area has its own
assessment plan.
Specific assessment program goals are to:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Provide students with timely and accurate information regarding their performance relative to
program goals (general education, academic major, non-academic programs)
Document and enhance the effectiveness of learning and teaching across the campus;
Continuously enhance the effectiveness of programs (academic and non-academic) which indicates
deliberate changes to the curriculum;
Provide information to the campus that will be used to inform program and institutional policy and
process (budgeting/resource allocation, strategic planning, program reviews, faculty professional
development);
Support VCSU’s responsibility to anticipate and be responsive to the changing needs of our
students and of our society
Provide timely and relevant information to the community and to other external constituencies (e.g.,
regional and specialized accreditation agencies).
D. Scope of the Assessment Program
VCSU’s assessment program involves the entire campus with a primary focus on academic programs.
Specifically:
- Major and minor academic programs, including an examination of the effectiveness of services
courses
- General Education Program
- Student Affairs (affective/social dimensions)
- University Library (Allen Memorial Library)(including electronic information resources)
- Academic Support Services
- Administrative Units
- Instructional Support Units
3
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Assessing the Impact of Instructional Technology. Given that VCSU reflects a technology rich learning
environment, the scope of the assessment program also includes a strong focus on the impact of
instructional technology on student learning. The responsibility for assessing and evaluating such impact
rests primarily within the academic divisions, and most directly, with the VCSU faculty. VCSU Faculty
have already demonstrated their commitment to gaining a deeper understanding of how technology
changes both learning and teaching. Given the caliber of the faculty, this commitment will undoubtedly
continue. Coordination of this special assessment emphasis area will occur at the institutional level.
Assessment and Program Reviews. Student assessment is a key element of VCSU’s program review
process but does not replace the academic program review process. Assessment is another piece of
evidence that programs can use to demonstrate overall effectiveness. In addition, assessment information
is a key piece of other processes such as curriculum enhancement, budgeting, and strategic planning.
Assessment results could also be used to support the hiring of additional faculty members. VCSU’s
program review template is found in Appendix B. All future program reviews must use this template as
their prepare their self-study report (program review report).
E. Assessment Program Guiding Principles
The Principles are intended to serve as basic operating guidelines for all VCSU faculty, staff, students,
and administrators. Further, they are intended to clarify some basic questions about assessment and to
indicate a starting point for those who are either beginning their work with assessment or who already
possess considerable expertise.
The Principles are:
I
Leadership of and responsibility for the assessment of student learning rests with the VCSU
faculty. Without their ongoing and passionate commitment to continuously enhancing the
learning and teaching environment, assessment will be only an administrative endeavor that
consumes precious resources.
II
The VCSU administration is primarily responsible for providing ongoing and significant
support of the VCSU assessment endeavor. Support is more than just words about the
importance of assessment. Faculty must be provided with the time, resources, and
opportunities for professional development as they enhance their own learning—which in
turn—enhancing the learning of VCSU students.
III
Assessment focuses on the effectiveness of academic programs and is not another mechanism
to evaluate individual faculty performance.
IV
Assessment results are not tied to faculty evaluation processes that occur for the purposes of
promotion, tenure, or setting salary levels.
V
Within academic units or other VCSU units, all faculty and staff members are responsible for
the planning, conduct, and use of assessment results.
VI
Student involvement in assessment is essential. All programs and units should specifically
include students in all aspects of their assessment efforts.
VII
Focus on the quality of assessment efforts and not just on quantity. Determine “what matters
most” in your program or unit. Prioritize and focus—start small. Conduct pilot or initial
projects to determine whether your assessment approach could be improved. Build upon
what your department or unit is already accomplishing in the assessment arena.
4
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
VIII
Individual student level data is highly confidential. Only summary data is reported to
institutional or division levels. Individual student names are not to be released.
VIV
Use the AAHE “Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning throughout all
assessment efforts (See Appendix C). Within each principle, solid advice for both assessment
beginners and those with some experience exist. If applied faithfully, assessment will be
useful instead of just another bureaucratic exercise.
IV. VCSU’s Ability-Based Assessment Model
A. The University Abilities and Skills
VCSU’s assessment model is grounded in eight abilities and 22 accompanying skills (see page 29 of the
2000-2002 VCSU Bulletin). Developed after extensive consultation with Alverno College (a leader in
the abilities-based assessment approach), the Abilities and Skills are relatively new and were developed
as a part of the FIPSE and Title III activities described in Appendix A.
Drafted and endorsed by the VCSU faculty, the Abilities and Skills have been continuously refined since
1996. During the Spring 2000 semester, they were formally adopted by the VCSU Faculty Senate. The
Abilities and Skills (the instructional outcomes for the VCSU General Education Program) are:
Abilities
Aesthetic Engagement
Collaboration
Communication
Effective Citizenship
Global Awareness
Problem-Solving
Technology
Wellness
Skills
Receptivity, Visualization
Positive Interdependence, Leadership
Written, Spoken, Visual. Performance
Provides Service to Others, Change Agent Skills, Teaches Others
Works with Diversity, Understands System Interrelationships
Gathering Information, Creative Thinking, Systems Analysis,
Problem Recognition, Decision-Making
Selects, Applies
Self-Management, Self-Worth
The skills serve to define each of their respective abilities.
Adapted from Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, five levels are associated with each skill.
Level one is reflects the most basic level of skill attainment (such as defining and listing) while level five
represents the high skill level in which the “student demonstrates the depth and breadth of understanding
necessary to select and apply concepts broadly” (see page 2, VCSU Abilities, Skills, Levels, April 2000).
The Portfolio Assessment Requirement. Beginning in 2002, every VCSU graduate will complete a digital
(CD-ROM) portfolio that demonstrates their skill level in relation to the Abilities specified by their
division/program as well as the fourth skill level for five of the eight University Abilities in order to meet
the VCSU graduation requirements. The primary purpose of the portfolio requirement at VCSU is to
assess student progress in the relation to the Abilities and Skills.
B. Implementation of the Abilities and Skills
Academic Program Assessment. Each of the six divisions has selected the abilities (outcomes) upon
which division/department assessment plans are based (see page 39 of the 2000-2002 VCSU Bulletin):
5
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Communication Arts and Social Sciences
Communication, Aesthetic Engagement/Problem
Solving, Problem Solving/Technology, and
Global Awareness
Education and Psychology
All eight Abilities + proficiency in teaching
abilities
Fine Arts
Aesthetic Engagement/Problem Solving, Global
Awareness, Communication, Collaboration
Business and CIS
Communication, Problem Solving, Global
Awareness, Collaboration, Technology
Health and Physical Education
Problem Solving, Wellness, Technology
Mathematics and Science
Problem Solving/Technology, Collaboration,
Global Awareness, Communication
Within each division, all courses are designed to address one or more of the Abilities and Skills selected
by the Division. A project-based implementation approach is used in which students complete projects
and/or activities designed to demonstrate a given ability. Each Division has developed a course mapping
depicting how individual courses are linked to division-specific Abilities.
In addition, each division is responsible for developing division-specific portfolio assessment process.
Note that the content of the student portfolios varies by division. For example, one division might require
students to take a standardized exam designed to assess content knowledge in the major (e.g., the ETS
Major Field Achievement Test) while another elect to develop a locally developed senior content
knowledge exam.
Divisional Assessment Plans may be found in Appendix D. All plans include the abilities/course
mapping as well as the divisional portfolio evaluation criteria.
General Education Assessment. Similarly, an Abilities-Course map shows how individual courses across
the six academic division are linked to the eight abilities. A project-based implementation approach is
also used in the general education courses. The General Education portfolio assessment process is
described in greater detail in Appendix E.
V. The Assessment Model
A. Assessment and the VCSU Institutional Effectiveness Model
The distinction between the assessment of student academic achievement and institutional effectiveness
(IE) is an important one. Institutional effectiveness refers to the degree to which VCSU succeeds in fully
addressing its educational and other purposes. Hence, academic units, units with student learning
assessment responsibilities outside of the classroom, and all other units are collectively involved in
ensuring that these purposes are fully and effectively addressed. The goals and mission statements of all
VCSU units are directly linked with the VCSU mission statement.
However, the assessment of student academic achievement is a distinct effort that functions independently
function but is related to the assessment efforts of other units and organizations on campus. This
6
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
distinction ensures VCSU is able to distinguish between “what students have learned from the evaluation
of those parts of the college or university that enable the students to learn” (Lopez, 1996).
The cornerstone of VCSU’s IE model is the assessment of student academic achievement. Other
components of the model include student affairs, academic support services, administrative units,
Library/electronic information resources, and instructional support. Each unit has developed a separate
assessment plan. Coordination of the plans are coordinated at the university level with the intent that the
assessment results from all units will be integrated into the major institutional processes, in particular,
strategic planning and budgeting/resource allocation. The VCSU IE plan may be found at Appendix F
(Note: not yet developed but the idea is that it will have the same purpose as Figure 1 in Celia Lopez’
1999 document “A Decade of Assessing Student Learning: What We Have Learned; What’s Next? The
IE plan is the vehicle by which VCSU shows that assessment is a campus-wide activity and one in which
assessment results are clearly incorporated (used) into institutional processes.
The individual assessment plans for units other than the academic divisions appear in Appendix G. Each
unit is responsible for designing and implementing an assessment cycle that functions meets the
requirements of the overall institutional assessment cycle.
Coordination of VCSU’s IE program will occur as part of the University-Wide Assessment Board (Note:
clearly, this doesn’t exist now; although the responsibility for assessment within the various academic and
other campus units rests within those units, an institutional-level entity that not only coordinates campus
efforts but also develops and implements policy is needed. By definition, the membership is
representative of the campus with more representation from the academic side. It is highly recommended
that the Faculty Association directs/leads all activities. Ultimately, the NCA recommends that one person
should be held responsible for all assessment results, e.g., the VPAA. On the institutional effectiveness
side, perhaps the President? The IE issues could be dealt with via a working group attached to the Board.
B. Unit/Program Assessment Cycle
The VCSU assessment model consists of two interrelated components: the unit assessment cycle and the
institutional assessment cycle. Given that student assessment also includes student learning that occurs
outside of the classroom, the term “unit” refers to academic department or an office within the student
affairs division.
At the academic group or unit level, assessment is critical to evaluating and making curricular
improvements. For a unit such as Student Affairs, assessment is used to refine student programs and to
enhance the delivery of products and services. The cycle consists of eight major activities and assumes
that the programs/unit mission goals are linked to the VCSU mission statement and that the mission and
goal statements have been recently examined and refined. If not, such activities should occur prior to
beginning the assessment cycle.
Note that this cycle can also be adapted to the individual course.
The eight major activities are:
(1)
Identify the program/unit learning objectives for each goal (or program/unit objectives if
your organization is found in the non-academic arena). Learning objectives should be
based upon the unit/program mission and goals and will be more general than objectives
designed for the course level. Try to limit the number of objectives and remember to
maintain the focus on educational values or what matters most! (AAHE Assessment
principle #1).
7
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
(2)
(3)
Specify the measurable student learning outcomes based upon the learning objectives
(outcomes can be thought of as what students are expected to be able to know and to do
upon program or course completion). Outcomes are typically cognitive, behavioral, or
attitudinal. Bloom’s (1956) Taxonomy reflects cognitive outcomes.
Specify the assessment measures to be used for each outcome as well as the process by
which assessment data will be collected. The use of multiple assessment tools represents
an assessment best practice and is strongly recommended. Do not rely exclusively on
surveys (an indirect assessment tool). Be sure to include actual (direct) measures of
learning (e.g., oral exams, tests). Take the time to answer key questions such as: which
students will be involved? How often will the assessments occur? How are all faculty
included in the assessment process?
(4)
Develop performance criteria (benchmarks) for each assessment measure. Determine
how the program or unit will know when students have attained the desired level of
performance. How will a non-academic unit know that it is performing at expected
levels? What level of performance will exceed the desired performance levels?
(5)
Collect assessment data.
(6)
Analyze and interpret the assessment data. What does the data mean in relation to the
student learning outcomes?
(7)
Use of the Assessment Results. All assessment data should be used to inform change,
whether to the curriculum, course schedules, or to the mix of programs and services
offered to students outside of the classroom. This is the information that will be used for
program enhancement, institutional effectiveness, and accreditation purposes. The
question is basically: how were assessment results used to inform changes designed to
enhance student learning? It is important to specify the feedback process---how is the
information distributed, to whom, and how often.
Identify and implement changes to the unit/program assessment program . Identify the
strengths and weaknesses of the assessment approach based upon the assessment results.
(8)
The length of an assessment cycle may vary, e.g., an academic year, every three years. Typically, the
unit/program assessment cycle is dependent upon the institutional assessment cycle. Units/programs can
have multiple cycles, one for the institution and others that are designed to meet non-institutional
requirements.
The cycle described above is an ongoing process that occurs from year to year and should become a part
of the normal unit/program activity.
C. Institutional Assessment Cycle and Timelines
A major function of the institutional assessment cycle is the integration of unit/program assessment cycles
into a coherent process that will inform both the institution and institutional processes such as strategic
planning and budgeting.
General Education Assessment Cycle
Institutional Assessment Cycle (graphic)
8
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
VI. Assessment Program Administration and Structure
9
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
VII. References
American Association for Higher Education (1992). Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student
Learning.
American Association for Higher Education (1995). Defining of Assessment. AAHE Bulletin, 48(2), 7–9.
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals
(Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company, Inc.
Boyer, E. L. (1997). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. The Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Lopez, C. L. (1996). Opportunities for improvement: Advice from consultant-evaluators on programs to
assess student learning. North Central Accreditation Commission on Institutions of Higher
Education. Chicago, IL: NCACS.
10
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix A: History of VCSU’s Assessment Program
The initial VCSU assessment plan was developed during the self-study process for the 1991-1992 North
Central Association (NCA) comprehensive visit. This plan appears in the self-study document submitted
to the NCA by VCSU in March of 1992. Given that the NCA assessment requirement was undergoing
implementation at the same time that VCSU conducted the self-study, the NCA asked VCSU to submit a
status report in June of 1994, thereby updating the NCA on VCSU progress in the area of student
outcomes assessment.
During this two year time period, VCSU remained focused on realizing the promises of student outcomes
assessment. VCSU adopted a comprehensive philosophy entitled Continuous Improvement in Teaching
and Learning (CITL), which was based upon the Total Quality Improvement (TQI) philosophy that had
been adopted by the North Dakota University System in 1989. “Over the past two years…the faculty of
VCSU have evolved into enthusiastic pioneers in applying these principles to the classroom” (1994
VCSU NCA Status Report, p. 4). Through 1994, the CITL philosophy served as VCSU’s conceptual
framework for all assessment efforts.
In addition to the use of the CITL philosophy to guide campus assessment activities, the 1992 – 1994
period also brought a flurry of assessment activities and faculty efforts designed to learn more about
assessment and how assessment would benefit VCSU. Assessment experts, including external
consultants and VCSU faculty, presented a number of workshops designed to explore how the current
national assessment movement might benefits VCSU. Several faculty members and a student visited the
highly respected Alverno College, a pioneer in the area of the “student assessment as learning”
philosophy.
External grant funds, in the form of a three-year FIPSE grant, designed to create “a system-wide
laboratory for the reform of undergraduate education” (1994 VCSU NCA Status Report, p. 4). This grant
provided the resources for increased faculty activity and professional development in student assessment.
Some faculty members (innovators) changed courses. Brown bag lunches were held to promote faculty
discussion about a variety of topics such as portfolio assessment.
The 1992 – 1994 period also resulted in a reexamination of the VCSU general education program, then
known as the Foundation Studies Program. Although not completed at the time the 1994 status report
was submitted to the NCA, the overall focus of this effort was to map how each course contributed to the
“achievement of Foundation Studies objective” (1994 VCSU NCA Status Report, p. 5).
VCSU also focused on the role of technology as a part of the learning process by participating in one of
the earliest surveys of how technology impacts student learning (developed by Kenneth C. Green). This
survey effort continues today and is one of the most respected sources of the impact of technology on the
classroom environment. Given the emphasis on instructional technology in VCSU current mission
statement, one can see the early roots of VCSU’s role as a leader in the effective use of instructional
technology.
In the 1994 status report (page 7), VCSU summarized their progress in this way:
“We now see and feel the need to define very clearly and specifically the organization values that
will guide all future initiatives, using them as touchstones in conjunction with out institutional
purposes and Foundation Studies objectives. We need to revisit our conceptual framework, test
and refine it on the basis of our experiences, and map onto it the innovations and assessments that
are most essential. We also need to broaden the base of student involvement and assist each
entering student in preparing to participate in this environment…Finally, we need to become
11
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
highly sophisticated, institutionally and individually, as change agents. While we certainly want
and expect to use assessment results for accountability, their most powerful impact is when we
apply the results to improve teaching and learning—and improvement requires change. In
Leadership is an Art, Max DePree wrote: “We cannot become what we need to be by remaining
what we are.”
By the 1995-1996 academic year, three of the six academic divisions reported the full implementation of
their assessment plans (Communication Arts and Social Sciences, Education and Psychology, and Fine
Arts). The remaining divisions were in different phases of developing and implementing their assessment
plans.
Two external grants, awarded during 1995, resulted in fundamental changes in VCSU’s approach to
student assessment. By comparing the status of assessment in 1995 to the status of assessment in 2001,
the significant impact of these grants and the progress realized by VCSU can be easily seen. In 1995, a
$300,00o FIPSE grant was awarded to VCSU for the purposes of establishing “an organizational climate
for instructional innovation” (1995-1996 Revised VCSU Assessment Plan, p. 18). The FIPSE Advisory
Council (FAC) was established and the focuses of the 1995-1996 academic year became student
assessment. During this year, an early version of VCSU’s eight Abilities and Skills was developed by
transforming the Foundation Studies objectives as abilities and skills that all VCSU students will develop
during their VCSU career. The digital portfolio requirement, as reflected in the 2000-2002 VCSU
Bulletin (p. 28), shows how far VCSU has evolved in the area of student assessment since 1995.
The second grant was the Title III grant awarded in 1995. The major focus of the grant was the
development and implementation of a program that resulted in “student-produced senior CD-ROM
portfolios that enhance the learning experience” (Summative Assessment of the Title III, Grant,
September 2000, p. 1). Through the Title III grant, the VCSU portfolio initiative was begun. During the
Fall of 1996 VCSU launched the notebook initiative, and the timing could not have been better. The
1995 – 1996 academic year was a year of education about the Portfolio Initiative and notebook computers
were assigned to all faculty and students just one year later.
Clearly, VCSU’s progress in 2001 can be credited in a large part to the two grants--as well as to the fact
that the two grants were designed to work in concert in order to further VCSU’s progress in the area of
student assessment. The Title III grant allowed more than just the introduction of the CD-ROM senior
portfolios. The grant also provided for the development of an early version of VCSU’s current
assessment model. Initially, the model evolved out of the need to evaluate changes in student learning as
a result of the Title III grant. By Fall 2000, all academic divisions had identified the Abilities that serve
as the focus for all divisional and department-based assessment efforts and were in the process of
developing strategies for evaluating the degree to which students have developed the abilities.
Assessment in the area of General Education (formerly the Foundation Studies Program) has progressed
significantly. A general education course review occurred during Fall 2000 to determine the degree to
which the Abilities were reflected in general education course syllabi. Subsequently, all general
education courses were required to specify the Ability and skills to be addressed by the specific course.
Assessment methods were also included in the syllabi. In addition, a mapping of how each general
education courses links to the Abilities was developed.
12
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix B. Academic Program Review Template
13
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix C: AAHE “Principles of Good Practice For Assessing Student Learning (AAHE, 1995)
The nine principles were developed through a joint effort of American Association for Higher Education
(AAHE) Assessment Forum and a grant from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education
(FIPSE). A tenth has been proposed by Trudy W. Banta, one of the original authors of the nine
principles.
1. The assessment of student learning begins with educational values. Assessment is not an end in itself
but a vehicle for educational improvement. Its effective practice, then, begins with and enacts a vision of
the kinds of learning we most value for students and strive to help them achieve. Educational values
should drive not only what we choose to assess but also how we do so. Where questions about
educational m ission and values are skipped over, assessment threatens to be an exercise in measuring
what’s easy, rather than a process of improving what we really care about.
2. Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional,
integrated, and revealed in performance over time. Learning is a complex process. It entails not only
what students know but what they can do with what they know; it involves not only knowledge and
abilities but values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect both academic success and performance
beyond the classroom. Assessment should reflect these understandings by employing a diverse array of
methods, including those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as to reveal change,
growth, and increasing degrees of integration. Such an approach aims for a more complete and accurate
picture of learning, and therefore firmer bases for improving our students’ educational experience
3. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purpose.
Assessment is a goal-oriented process. It entails comparing educational performance with educational
purposes and expectations--these derived from the institution’s mission, from faculty intentions in
program and course design, and from knowledge of students’ own goals. Where program purposes lack
specificity or agreement, assessment as a process pushes a campus toward clarity about where to aim and
what standards to apply; assessment also prompts attention to where and how program goals will be
taught and learned. Clear, shared, implementable goals are the cornerstone for assessment that is focused
and useful.
4. Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those
outcomes. Information about outcomes is of high importance; where students “end up” matters greatly.
But to improve outcomes, we need to know about student experience along the way--about the curricula,
teaching, and kind of student effort that lead to particular outcomes. Assessment can help us understand
which students learn best under what conditions; with such knowledge comes the capacity to improve the
whole of their learning
5. Assessment works best when it is ongoing, not episodic. Assessment is a process whose power is
cumulative. Though isolated, “one-shot” assessment can be better than none, improvement over time is
best fostered when assessment entails a linked series of cohorts of students; it may mean collecting the
same examples of student performance or using the same instrument semester after semester. The point is
to monitor progress toward intended goals in a spirit of continuous improvement. Along the way, the
assessment process itself should be evaluated and refined in light of emerging insights.
6. Assessment fosters wider improvement when representatives from across the educational community
are involved. Student learning is a campus-wide responsibility, and assessment is a way of enacting that
responsibility. Thus, while assessment efforts may start small, the aim over time is to involve people from
across the educational community. Faculty play an especially important role, but assessment’s questions
can’t be fully addressed without participation by student-affairs educators, librarians, administrators, and
14
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
students. Assessment may also involve individuals from beyond the campus (alumni/ae, trustees,
employers) whose experience can enrich the sense of appropriate aims and standards for learning. Thus
understood, assessment is not a task for small groups of experts but a collaborative activity; its aim is
wider, better-informed attention to student learning by all parties with a stake in its improvement.
7. Assessment makes a difference when it begins with issues of use and illuminates questions that
people really care about. Assessment recognizes the value of information in the process of improvement.
But to be useful, information must be connected to issues or questions that people really care about. This
implies assessment approaches that produce evidence that relevant parties will find credible, suggestive,
and applicable to decisions that need to be made. It means thinking in advance about how the information
will be used, and by whom. The point of assessment is not to gather data and return “results”; it is a
process that starts with the questions of decision-makers, that involves them in the gathering and
interpreting of data, and that informs and helps guide continuous improvement.
8. Assessment is most likely to lead to improvement when it is part of a larger set of conditions that
promote change. Assessment alone changes little. Its greatest contribution comes on campuses where the
quality of teaching and learning is visibly valued and worked at. On such campuses, the push to improve
educational performance is a visible and primary goal of leadership; improving the quality of
undergraduate education is central to the institution’s planning, budgeting, and personnel decisions. On
such campuses, information about learning outcomes is seen as an integral part of decision making, and
avidly sought.
9. Through assessment educators meet responsibilities to student. There is a compelling public stake in
education. As educators, we have a responsibility to the publics that support or depend on us to provide
information about the ways in which our students meet goals and expectations. But that responsibility
goes beyond the reporting of such information; our deeper obligation--to ourselves, our students, and
society--is to improve. Those to whom educators are accountable have a corresponding obligation to
support such attempts at improvement.
The 10th principle proposed by Banta is:
10. Assessment is most effective when undertaken in an environment that is receptive, supportive, and
enabling.
15
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix D: Divisional Assessment Plans/Course Ability Maps
16
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix E: General Education Program Assessment
28
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix F: VCSU’s Institutional Effectiveness Plan
30
DRAFT (January 31, 2001)
Appendix G: Unit Assessment Plans (Other than Academic Divisions
32