Christine Licata Senior Associate Provost RIT Anne Wahl Director of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment RIT Institutional Assessment: Connecting the Puzzle Pieces MSCHE Presentation December 11, 2011 Workshop Outcomes 1. Self-assess infrastructure design and processes 2. Review program level assessment framework 3. Determine which tools and strategies to adopt or adapt Institutional Assessment Major “pieces” of the puzzle: 1. Corner pieces Infrastructure 2. Center pieces: Student learning outcomes assessment Administrative unit effectiveness Institutional Assessment Infrastructure - 4 Corner Pieces Corner Piece: Strategic Vision RIT’s Strategic Plan Key Results Area #3: Demonstrate Educational Excellence Performance Commitment 11a. Meet/exceed outcome goals for program-level student learning FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Act Goal Act Goal Act Goal Act Goal Act Goal i. Expected program student learning achievement levels NA met or exceeded. NA 40% NA NA 55% NA 65% NA 75% NA 90% 85% NA 85% NA 85% NA 100% ii. Assessment results and processes guide planning and improvement. NA Corner Piece: Strategic Vision - Provost’s Academic Quality Dashboard Output Indicators: Learning Outcomes Corner Piece: Governance Structure Three Central Committees 1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee (SLOAC) (Academic Programs) 2. University Assessment Council (UAC) (Administrative Units) 3. General Education Committee (GEC) (General Education Framework) Corner Piece: Governance Structure 1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee (SLOAC) Key Support Areas: Program level assessment Annual progress report Nine colleges represented Meet monthly Formal charge & work plan Corner Piece: Governance Structure 2. University Assessment Council (UAC) Key support areas: Institutional Effectiveness Map Annual Progress Report All divisions represented Meet every-other month Formal charge & needs assessment Corner Piece: Governance Structure 3. General Education Committee (Standing Committee of Academic Senate) Nine colleges represented Meet weekly Formal charge Key support areas: General Education Framework General Education Assessment Plan Corner Piece: Leadership and Coordination Centralized Support and Leadership for Assessment One office responsible for Student Learning Outcomes Assessment – in Provost’s Office Permanent budget Building capacity - staff: Director, Senior Assessment Associate, Assessment Management System Coordinator, and Senior Staff Assistant Director co-chairs UAC and is a member of SLOAC, GEC, Data Warehouse Steering Committee, Survey Council Developing resources and website Faculty stipends Corner Piece: Leadership and Coordination http://www.rit.edu/academicaffairs/outcomes/ Corner Piece: Existing Resources and Data Sources Examples of Existing Resources Institutional Research and Policy Studies Office Data warehouse and student surveys Teaching and Learning Center Workshops and events for faculty Cooperative Education Office Co-op evaluation Assessment Management System (TaskStream) Corner Piece: Existing Resources and Data Sources Samples of Existing Data Sources Assessment Resources ASQ Admitted Student Questionnaire Program-level Assessment of Student Learning Co-operative Experience Evaluation Delaware Study Campus Climate Survey Employee Satisfaction Survey CSI – Freshmen Survey NSSE Noel Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey Academic Program Review (2015) Alumni Survey Student-to-Student Survey Enrollment Budget Projections and Forecasting Internal Audits Space Utilization Study Student Evaluations of Teaching Institutional Research Data Middle States Standards 8 14 14 10 7,9 7 7, 9 1, 7, 9, 12 1, 7, 9 1,2,11 7, 11 9 2, 3 3 3 7, 10 1, 2, 7 Center Piece: Program-Level Assessment Framework Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes: Planning Implementing Using Results Sustaining Center Piece: Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes Planning University-wide engagement: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee (SLOAC) Common language: Program-Level Assessment Plan Center Piece: Program-Level Assessment Plan Program Goals List programlevel goals Student Learning Outcomes Students will be able to: (task, capability, knowledge, skills, and dispositions) Use measurable verbs. Academic Program Profile Align to the RIT essential outcomes Check all that apply. Critical Thinking Ethical Reasoning Integrative Literacies Global Interconnectedness Creative/Innovative Thinking Data Source Measure Curriculum Mapping Assessment opportunity Course or Experience Method measures Assignment rubric Benchmark Timeline Standard, target, or achievement level (usually a %) Statement of student success Identify when and how data are collected aggregated and analyzed Data Analysis Key Findings Use of Results Action Items and Dissemination Identify who is responsible and list key findings Identify how results are used and shared. List recommendations or action items Center Piece: Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes Implementing Building relationships: from 1:1 to “moving in” Leveraging accreditation Providing support and resources for : Benchmarking Designing instruments Developing rubrics Conducting data analyses Center Piece: Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes Use of Results RIT Annual Progress Report (3 samples) College-level action plans SLOA office resources/support Progress Report Sample Emerging Assessment Program BS Criminal Justice PROGRAM OUTCOME 1 PROGRAM OUTCOME 2 Program Level Student Learning Outcome (SLO) Demonstrate knowledge of key concepts, Utilize critical thinking skills to apply policy issues, legal and ethical issues knowledge to social issues in crime and surrounding crime and justice criminal justice policies Assessment Method Course: Seminar in Criminal Justice Final Field Experience Capstone Paper (mapped Examination (mapped to SLO) to SLO) Achievement Benchmarks and Results Benchmark: 70% of students will earn a grade of C or better Results: 81% met goal Use of Results Faculty recommend moving from 1 comprehensive final to mini-exams to provide additional assessment opportunities and feedback. Re-assessment in spring Benchmark: 70% will earn a grade of C or better Results: 100% met goal Faculty to review rubric and rating process to determine alignment of rubric to SLO and consistency of grading Progress Report Sample Developed Assessment Program BS Game Design and Development PROGRAM OUTCOME 1 PROGRAM OUTCOME 2 Program Level Student Learning Outcome(SLO) Apply current technical concepts and practices Incorporate accepted game industry processes within the computing disciplines to the field of towards the construction of a game design and game design and development development application or prototype Assessment Method -Programming for Digital Media Course- selected Homework and Project rubric (mapped to both SLOs) Achievement Benchmarks and Results Benchmark: 80% will achieve a 3 (acceptable) or Benchmark: 80% will achieve a 3 (acceptable) higher average score across rubric items or higher average score across rubric items Results: 83% met goal Results: 63% achieved 3 Use of Results Data was disseminated to faculty & Chair. Results discussed at faculty retreat. No action required as benchmark was met, but information was utilized in the Semester Conversion Process. Analysis showed the content was too condensed at week 8- limited time for polished prototype experience. Course modified- content spread over 10 weeks. Re-assessment will take place in next cycle. Progress Report Sample Highly Developed Assessment Program BS Mechanical Engineering PROGRAM OUTCOME 1 PROGRAM OUTCOME 2 Program Level Student Learning Outcome (SLO) Work independently and collaboratively while Enhance skills through formal education and demonstrating the professional and ethical training, independent inquiry, and professional responsibilities of the engineering profession. development. Assessment Method Employer Evaluation of Co-op Experience Student Co-op Self-Evaluation: students rated Student Co-op Self-Evaluation need/value of continuous learning Achievement Benchmarks and Results Benchmark: 100% will earn a 4 or above Benchmark: 100% rank this as a 4 or above in Results: 100% scored 4 or above by employers in: terms of importance ethics, teamwork, leadership, respect. Students Results: 100% of students ranked the importance level as a 4 or higher scored themselves above 3, but below the levels reported by employers (4). Use of Results Discrepancy between student and employers •Results suggest students understand and feel suggest a need to offer more opportunities to prepared for continuous learning throughout develop team building and leadership skills. career. Further discussion by faculty in fall 2011 to •Results are guiding strategic decisions at the determine how further skill building in department level about the future of engineering teamwork and leadership can be intentionally education and approach to marketplace needs. incorporated into curriculum. Center Piece: Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes Sustaining Technology Assessment Management System Website Integrated processes Academic program review Annual reporting Communication - regular sharing and dissemination of findings and use of results Closing the Loop Input to budget Informs strategic planning Center Piece: Administrative Unit Effectiveness University Assessment Council (UAC) Assessment Management System Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Map Next Steps: AMS Annual Report Develop unit audit Center Piece: Administrative Unit Effectiveness: IE Map Administrative Unit: Mission: Contact Name: Administrative Division Strategic Plan Unit Goal Key Results Area Objectives (If Align to the RIT’s Key or Applicable) Results Areas - check Outcomes all that apply OR list other Strategic Initiative. KRA 1 Renowned for Student Success KRA 2 Maximize Opportunities for Innovation, Creativity, Research and Scholarship KRA 3 Execute with Organizational and/or Operational Excellence KRA 4 Achieve Highest Levels of Stakeholder Satisfaction Other Strategic Initiative - please list Academic Year: Data Source Benchmark Timeline Achievement Next Steps or Unit Activities or & of Actions Method/ Standard Person(s) Outcome/ What, if any, steps Measure Statement of Responsible Objective or actions will take Describe Success/ Indicated Indicate level of place as a result of metrics or Measureable Year, Cycle achievement the assessment instruments Outcome and/or findings used to Semester measure results Not Met Approaching Met Exceeded Center Piece: Institutional Assessment Self-Assessment Self-assessment tool for institutions Questions