A Perspective on Student
Learning at ECU
It’s working!
Marilyn Sheerer
Provost and Senior Vice Chancellor
Introduction
• Policymakers, Accrediting Bodies, and
Association Leaders continue to focus on
assessing student learning outcomes
• What is happening on the ground at ECU?
– Where does it rank in importance on our
action agenda?
– To what extent are faculty involved in
assessment activities?
– To what extent are faculty using the results for
improving student learning?
Themes of this Conversation
• Assessment has taken root at ECU – we
can demonstrate Best Practices
• Planning and assessment are
complementary work – demonstrating that
we are effectively accomplishing our mission
• The UNC Performance Funding Initiative
and Strategic Goals
Best Practices of Assessment
Review of Report
Components for
Improvement
Opportunities
Dissemination
of Results
Data-Driven
Decisions
Best Practices of Assessment
• Review of Report Components
– Biology Foundations: “This meeting came to the
conclusion that we needed to: 1) re-examine our
assessment instrument to ensure that the data collected
was meaningful and could be used for effective course
redesign, and 2) come up with a method to ensure
higher completion rates of the assessment tools.”
Best Practices of Assessment
• Review of Report Components- (Cont’d)
– Counseling & Student Development: “The center
created therapy groups that focus on the top presenting
issues. Knowing the usage patterns has enabled the
center to be more prepared during peak times with back
up services and support. This data has influenced how
crisis counselor rotations are assigned.”
Best Practices of Assessment
• Dissemination of Results
– Economics Foundations: “Results were reported to
instructors in courses surveyed and to the department
faculty for use to improve course content and
presentation.”
Best Practices of Assessment
• Dissemination of Results - (Cont’d)
– Academic Advising (Starfish Outcome): “Results of
the surveys have been communicated to
administrators and faculty. Individual meetings with
departmental chairs were scheduled for the purpose
of sharing survey results, receiving feedback for
improvements to Starfish and training, and inquiring
about faculty interest in collaborative research using
Starfish.”
Assessment Best Practices
• Data-Driven Decisions
– CON Dean’s Office: “Reorganized business office to
more efficiently administer grants. Frequent meetings
with PIs to review budget progress. Continue to utilized
university systems to ensure compliance with internal
controls.”
Assessment Best Practices
• Data-Driven Decisions - (Cont’d.)
– COE Center for Science, Math & Technology
(Professional Development Outcome): The data
collected from the meeting helped to direct the summer
professional offerings from the Center. Based on the
requests, the sessions mainly addressed short-term
need for teachers in mathematics and science. Over 20
sessions were offered and over 60 teachers trained in
the summer in areas varying from Algebra 1 and
discrete mathematics to scientific assessment and
digital literacy.
Assessment Best Practices
• Data-Driven Decisions - (Cont’d)
– Office of Grants & Contracts (Training Outcome): “As
requested on the survey, the training schedule was
revamped to provide more meeting, webinar and online style sessions. Additional training PowerPoint
presentations were developed and posted to OGC
website.”
Unknown number of
plans/reports from
educational programs &
support services
No centralized reporting
system
No infrastructure for
review of assessment
reports
IE of research units not
assessed
IE of service units not
assessed
2012
2007
Our growth in assessment!
400+ assessment units
in centralized reporting
system including
• 302 educational
program units
• 43 administrative
support service units
• 81 academic and
student support
service units
• 25 research units
• 22 service units
Improvements in Institutional
Effectiveness (IE) reported from SACS
Working Groups
Rubric developed and used
for review of assessment
reports
Formation of Institutional
Effectiveness Council
SharePoint workflow constructed
for the review of all academic
assessment reports. Process
includes department chairs,
associate deans for assessment,
deans, and university working
group
Established formal
processes of reporting for all
research and service units
Formation of Public Service
and Community Relations,
Chancellor's Division
Improvements in IE
Established
procedures for
benchmarking
materials
expenditures and
staffing against peers
using ASERL data
Faculty training and
peer review of online
instruction based on
new Distance
Education Policy
Established
procedures for
benchmarking
information literacy
results against peers
and aspirational
peers using
LibQUAL+ survey
data
Importance of this Work
 Assessment of student learning is the
centerpiece of SACS accreditation.
 Authentic assessment is our top
priority.
 Expect close scrutiny of DE, how we
monitor quality, training of faculty, peer
review of instruction.
 Not simply seeking SACS
reaffirmation:
Importance of this Work
“We are committed to changing the
way in which we assess our
teaching and learning, and thus, to
continuous improvement of our
entire educational paradigm.”
Provost’s Update
January 11, 2011 on ECU Official
Assessment Cycle
2012-2013
Units will receive
feedback in the
form of a rubric
IPAR will assist in
integrating the
assessment and
strategic planning
processes
Units will reflect on
feedback and use
to make changes in
TracDat
Units will continue
ongoing
assessment and
strategic planning
efforts
Tying Planning to Assessment
• Alignment of learning
outcomes with the
institutional mission
• Reduce the duplication of
efforts
• Strategic Directions are
evaluated using
assessment techniques
• Assure congruent linking to
optimize the
accomplishment of annual
and long-term goals.
• Integrate planning and
assessment into existing
organizational reporting
efforts and timelines.
• Provide assessment and
planning training to the
university and implement a
communication plan.
• Build a culture of
continuous improvement
that is centralized and
based on data and the use
of results.
UNC: Our Time, Our Future
(DRAFT - 2012)
1. Set Degree Attainment Goals Responsive to
State Needs
2. Strengthen Academic Quality
3. Serve the People of North Carolina
4. Maximize Efficiencies
5. Ensure an Accessible and Financially Stable
University
UNC Model For Access & Student Success
Performance Based Funding Metrics
• ECU Performance Based Funding Metrics
– Freshmen-to-Sophomore Retention Rate
– Six-Year Graduation Rate
– NCCCS Transfer Student Retention Rate
– Degrees Awarded to Pell Recipients
– Degrees Awarded in STEM and Health
Disciplines
United States Department of Education
Strengthening Institutions Program: Title III
• Student Learning Outcomes
– development of department specific and
University-wide written, comprehensive plans
for utilizing institutional effectiveness planning
and assessment mechanisms to enhance
student learning
• Think, Value, Communicate & Lead (TVCL)
Framework
– Tool to assist a faculty driven approach to
defining what an ECU graduate should look
like