Valuing Learning - Assessment - Missouri State University

Missouri State University - West Plains

Skip search and site index

Assessment 

Valuing Learning

Vol. 1 No. 2

The Missouri State University-West Plains Assessment Committee

April 2004

Higher Learning Commission Report

The High Learning Commission review team visited Missouri State University-West Plains in November, 2003. In their Report, they observed that faculty had made notable strides in the last five years toward assessment of learning. The HLC review team also acknowledged the progress that has been made with the General Education Goals Reporting Matrix and development of teaching methods. Their charge, however, is for faculty to develop a sophisticated culture of learning assessment that will support improved learning outcomes at Missouri State University-West Plains.

Some of the keywords in their report that apply to planning an assessment program are thorough, simple, structured, organized, ongoing¸ and sustainable.The HLC reviewers indicated that the campus needs to develop shared tools such as a realistic timeline and an assessment vocabulary. The program should be based on sound assessment principles.

To achieve the goal of a campus culture of assessment, HLC recommends that Missouri State University-West Plains:

  • Select a Faculty Assessment Coordinator.
  • Link planning to budget.
  • Adopt and implement a structured mechanism to:
    • Identify measures.
    • Obtain pertinent data.
    • Analyze data.
    • Respond to outcomes.
    • Demonstrate how this process has improved learning at Missouri State University-West Plains.

The HLC reviewers also addressed the duties of a Faculty Assessment Coordinator, a position they recommend be developed. A Faculty Assessment Coordinator would:

  • Revise the assessment plan.
  • Document the use of multiple direct and indirect measures that assess learning.
  • Document and report the use of assessment data to improve student learning.

In light of our motto and mission at Missouri State University-West Plains, implementation of these recommendations continues the momentum of providing quality educational opportunities on a campus "where students come first."

Evelyn Vetter, Chair
Assessment Committee

Report of a Comprehensive Evaluation Visit to Missouri State University-West Plains, ID #2095, November 17-19, 2003, for the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools.

Direct and Indirect Measures of Learning Assessment

One of the recommendations from the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) visit last November was for faculty to adopt direct and indirect measures to assess learning that is taking place and to use the data gleaned from these measures to improve the learning process. The North Central Association has continued to evolve in their focus toward student learning, and after their review, we are developing a focus of our own. So, how does one distinguish between these types of measures?

Direct Measures of Student Learning

A direct assessment measure is one that provide useful information about the "value-added" to a student's learning by the general education program, major, etc. "especially when the results are triangulated and are compared with (1) baseline data and/or with (2) data from other measures taken over time" (Lopez, 1997). In direct measures, students demonstrate what they have learned in relationship to an evaluative instrument.

Examples of direct learning assessment measures include:

  • Capstone experience.
  • Portfolio assessment.
  • Standardized tests, e.g., Academic Profile, Text of Critical Thinking Ability, CAAP.
  • Performance on national licensure, certification, or professional exams, e.g., PRAXIS – Professional Assessment Exam for Beginning Teachers.
  • Locally developed tests.
  • Blindly scored essay questions across a department or school.
  • Qualitative juried review of comprehensive student projects.
  • Externally reviewed exhibitions or performances in the arts.

External Evaluation of performance during internships or service learning based on department objectives.

Indirect Measures of Student Learning

"Evaluators acknowledge that many sources of data if used alone are inadequate measures of student learning. However, some of these sources, when used to supplement direct measures, provide information that may enrich or illuminate aspects of what the direct measures tell us about students' academic achievements" (Lopez, 1997). In indirect measures, students and others are asked to reflect on learning experiences.

Examples of indirect measures of learning assessment include:

  • Alumni, employer, and student surveys.
  • Exit interviews of graduates.
  • Focus groups.
  • Graduate follow-up studies.
  • Retention and transfer studies.
  • Length of time to degree.
  • SAT scores.
  • Graduate rates and transfer rates.
  • Job placement data.

Lopez also says that often HLC evaluators find that information gathered on forms is mistakenly considered to be a measurement of student learning. Typically, this type of data-gathering is on an aspect or quality of the curriculum. The following are actually "non-measures" according to HLC:

  • Program review instruments.
  • Curriculum review reports.
  • External program-specific reviews.

Also considered to be "non-measures" are the following:

  • Faculty publication and recognition.
  • Course enrollments, profiles.
  • Faculty/student ratio.
  • Percent of students in foreign programs.
  • Enrollment trends.
  • Percent of student graduates in x number of years.
  • Diversity of the student body.

Last and definitely least are grades and GPAs. Why not grades? You may ask. Grades, according to HLC, only show achievement, not how much learning has actually taken place in a specific course or program. Remember, it's all about improving learning!

Evelyn Vetter, Chair
Assessment Committee

NCA position – Lopez, Cecelia L. Opportunities for Improvement: Advice from Consultant-Evaluators on Programs to Assess Student Learning.NCA, Commission on Institutions of Higher Education, March, 1997, (pp. 13-15).