NCA ASSESSMENT PLAN
Executive Summary
Southeast's original assessment plan, approved by the Board of Regents
in 1987, specified directions for the development of assessment in University
Studies, the undergraduate major, and teacher education. It also recommended
that a review of the assessment program should be conducted after a five-year
implementation period. The ad hoc Assessment Review Committee was appointed
in 1992-93 to conduct the review and develop a revised assessment plan
for the North Central Association of Colleges and Universities. The revised
plan incorporates many of the accomplishments of the preceding years while
recommending further refinements and additions that should strengthen the
use of assessment results for continuous program improvement. The resulting
plan exhibits the five characteristics of an assessment program recommended
by NCA.
1. Southeast's assessment plan is "linked to the mission, goals, and
objectives of the institution for student learning and academic achievement,
including learning in general education and in the major. " The University's
Statement of Institutional identity commits the institution to the creation
of an intellectually challenging learning environment, which includes a
forty-eight hour general education program based on nine measurable objectives,
and undergraduate and graduate programs in business, education, liberal
arts, health and human services, and the sciences and technologies. The
assessment plan specifies methods for assessing student academic achievement
in general education, the undergraduate major, and graduate programs and
for monitoring the quality of the learning environment.
2. Southeast's assessment plan provides "evidence that faculty have
participated in the development of the institution's plan and that the
plan is institution-wide in conceptualization and scope." The NCA assessment
plan was developed by an institution-wide committee consisting of faculty
representatives from each college and school, campus leaders in assessment,
and representatives from the divisions of Student Affairs and Finance &
Administration. The plan was shared with the Deans Council, college councils,
and Chairpersons Forum for comment and suggestions. The plan was approved
by the Assessment Review Committee, Academic Council, and Administrative
Council.
3. Southeast's assessment plan is likely to "lead to institutional improvement
when it is implemented" Results from assessment activities have led to
changes in curriculum, special projects intended to improve teaching and
learning, and changes in advising procedures. The Assessment Review Committee
revised the existing assessment program so as to place a greater emphasis
on the use of assessment for institutional improvement. Clarified reporting
procedures should increase awareness of assessment information, and the
closing of "the improvement loop" in revised departmental assessment plans
should encourage departments to use results for continuous program improvement.
4. Southeast's assessment plan is guided by an appropriate and realistic
timeline. The primary components of Southeast's assessment program have
already been implemented. Planned changes, such as revision of departmental
assessment plans and incorporation of assessment information into annual
departmental reports, can be accomplished in the one to two years proposed
by our timeline. Where more time is needed--for example, to increase the
breadth and depth of assessment in University Studies--a longer time period
is allotted. The proposal to conduct a general review of assessment in
1997-98 is timely in that it allows three years for current plans to come
to fruition and will lead naturally into the institutional self-study that
will commence in 1998-99.
5. Southeast's assessment plan “provides appropriate administration
of the assessment program." To maintain a clear link between assessment
and program improvement, assessment must be undertaken primarily by the
units that deliver academic programs. Hence, the plan affirms that assessment
of academic programs will be designed and administered by departments,
colleges, and schools. On the other hand, responsibility for assessment
is not so decentralized that assessment activities escape review in terms
of institutional priorities and commitments. The School of University Studies
has created the position of Director of Planning and Assessment to unify
program review in general education with assessment. The Assessment Review
Committee reports directly to the Provost, and the position of Assistant
Provost has been recast to include responsibilities for both program review
and assessment.
Introduction: History of Assessment at Southeast
The assessment program at Southeast grows out of commitments dating from
1967, when the University's Office of Institutional Research was founded.
From the mid to late 70's, the University collected information relating
to student academic achievement and institutional effectiveness. For example,
in 1977 the University first participated in the Cooperative Institutional
Research Program survey of entering and enrolled freshmen and continues
to do so biannually. In 1979 the Department of English, responding to perceived
inadequacies in the use of ACT scores for placement, developed a placement
test based on a writing sample. And in Spring 1980 the ETS Institutional
Goals Survey was used to obtain information about student, faculty, and
staff perceptions of institutional goals.
Assessment activities increased gradually in the early to mid 80's.
In 1983 the Committee on an Institutional System to Follow Up Graduates-composed
of faculty, administrative, staff, student, and community representatives--was
created to make recommendations for a campus-wide ' alumni survey system.
After guidelines for the alumni survey were developed, a second committee
designed an appropriate survey instrument, including optional departmental
inserts. In January 1985 the Office of Institutional Research mailed the
approved survey to 1,269 graduates from the Summer 1983 through Spring
1984 graduating classes. Earlier, in November 1984, the Board of Regents
had approved a graduation requirement that all students must pass a writing
proficiency test after completing 75 hours, and in Summer 1985 state funding
was obtained to implement the Writing Outcomes Program, a unit responsible
for writing assessment, the Writing Center, and writing-across-the-curriculum.
In preparation for pursuit of AACSB accreditation, the College of Business
Administration participated in the AACSB Core Curriculum Assessment Program,
which provides comparative data about students majoring in business. Also
at this time, several departments began to collect information on graduate
and medical school acceptance rates and performance on certification and
licensure exams (e.g., NCLEX & CPA Exam) for program review.
From 1985 on, the University's involvement in assessment grew rapidly.
The President and Provost attended a Fall 1985 conference on Quality, Assessment,
and Accountability in Undergraduate Higher Education, sponsored by the
National Governors’ Association Task Force on College Quality. Peter Ewell
came to campus to conduct a full-day workshop on assessment for chairpersons
and other administrators, and funds were allocated to academic departments,
to develop and pilot approaches to assessment in the major. Assessment
of student achievement received a formal focus in 1986, when an outcomes
assessment task force, including representatives from the community, faculty,
and students, was charged with developing an institutional outcomes assessment
plan. The plan was approved by the Board of Regents in May 1987. (Appendix
1)
From 1986 through 1990, the Office of the Provost initiated a variety
of assessment activities. Institutional Research prepared and distributed
a report on graduation rates for the period of 1981-87. The ACT COMP was
administered to samples of students as a measure of achievement in general
education. Systematic collection of data on entering freshmen, including
ACT scores, high school GPA’s, and other information, was implemented.
University grading patterns were analyzed. Two colleges mandated college-wide
assessment requirements. Consequently, all education majors now take CBASE
for admission to the program and an NTE test upon exiting, and all business
majors take the MFAT in their subject area. In the remaining colleges,
several departments adopted MFAT subject area tests as a source of comparative
information about their majors, while others explored alternative sources
of assessment information. The Division of Student Affairs, too, engaged
in a variety of focused assessment activities, including, for example,
the ACT Student Opinion Survey, the ACT Withdrawing/Non Returning Student
Survey, a residence hall satisfaction survey, and a co-curricular learning
survey. Finally, in Spring 1990, the University Planning Committee published
a document, Institutional Goals and Objectives for 1990-1995, which formally
acknowledged an institutional planning goal of implementing a systematic
plan of assessment for all University programs.
In Summer 1990, the position of Director of Assessment was created in
the Office of the Provost. Under the Director's leadership, assessment
was refined and expanded. In 1990, a committee chaired by the Director
undertook a review of the alumni survey and designed an enrolled student
survey. The survey of enrolled students was conducted for the first time
in 1991-92 along with the revised alumni survey. The University also participated
in state-wide assessment activities such as the Survey of Missouri Post-Secondary
Students administered by the CBHE in Spring 1993. The Director of Assessment
was instrumental in starting the Missouri Assessment Consortium, a group
of assessment leaders representing colleges and universities across the
state. Because of concerns about time, cost, and validity, use of the ACT
COMP as a measure of general education achievement was discontinued. It
was replaced by the short form of Academic Profile, which is administered
to samples of beginning freshmen and upper-division students. From 1990
through 1993, the Director of Assessment identified areas for improvement
in assessment of the major and general education, offered workshops on
assessment, assisted departmental assessment efforts, published a campus
assessment newsletter (Accent on Assessment), and developed a statement
of Student Assessment Principles (Appendix 2). The Assessment Review Committee
was appointed in Spring 1993 to evaluate and revise the University's assessment
plan and prepare this report. (See Appendix 3 for membership.)
Principles of Assessment
Southeast's assessment program is founded on fifteen principles. These
principles expand upon a statement of student assessment principles first
distributed by the Director of Assessment in 1992 and reflect the collective
judgment of the Assessment Review Committee. Together they constitute Southeast's
philosophy of assessment. This philosophy guides and will continue to guide
evaluation and revision of the University's assessment plan.
1 . Assessment should be a systematic, ongoing process that involves
gathering, interpreting, and using information for continuous improvement.
2. Assessment should focus on specific programs and activities that
contribute to the intellectual, professional, personal, and cultural needs
of students.
3. Assessment should be shaped and guided by faculty, students, and
staff, with administration and administrative processes providing essential
support.
4. Assessment should flow from the institutional mission, and the institution’s
mission should be shaped by the results of assessment when appropriate.
5. Assessment outcomes should be used in planning, budgeting, and allocating
resources.
6. Flexibility in the choice of assessment procedures should be encouraged,
permitting the exercise of professional judgment as to the appropriate
methods of assessment.
7. Assessment should be based on multiple measures both quantitative
and qualitative, including, for example, locally developed instruments,
surveys, nationally normed exams, external reviews, exit interviews, historical
data, and evaluation of performances.
8. The use of assessment results should determine the choice of assessment
procedures.
9. Assessment should be cost-effective.
10. Assessment procedures should be regularly evaluated as to their
usefulness for fostering continuous program improvement.
11. While assessment for accountability may be necessary, R should be
integrated as far as possible into assessment for improvement.
12. Assessment should be minimally intrusive on faculty, students, and
staff.
13. Assessment plans and activates should be continuously evaluated
and improved through peer review and discussion.
14. There should be regular comprehensive reviews of the assessment
plan.
15. Assessment and the use of assessment results Should not unfairly
restrict institutional goals of diversity and access.
Relationship of Assessment to Institutional Goals
The purpose of academic assessment is to provide useful information about
student achievement as it relates to the institution's academic goals.
These goals, detailed in Southeast Missouri State University's Statement
of Institutional Identity, include the following:
That Southeast Missouri State University
· Aspires to create an intellectually challenging learning environment
supported by a commitment to excellence in teaching.
· Seeks to provide an outstanding 48 hour general education program
(University Studies) with nine major measurable objectives. Students must:
1 . Demonstrate the ability to locate and gather information.
2. Demonstrate capabilities for critical thinking, reasoning, and analyzing.
3. Demonstrate effective communication skills.
4. Demonstrate an understanding of human experiences and the ability
to relate them to the present.
5. Demonstrate an understanding of various cultures and their interrelationships.
6. Demonstrate the ability to integrate the breadth and diversity of
knowledge and experience.
7. Demonstrate the ability to make informed, intelligent value decisions.
8. Demonstrate the ability to make informed, sensitive aesthetic responses.
9. Demonstrate the ability to function responsibly in one's natural,
social, and political environment.
· Provides quality undergraduate and graduate programs in business,
education, liberal arts, health and human services, the sciences and technologies.
· Commits to holistic integrated student learning and to the
development of graduates who respect diversity and understand the increasing
globalization of society.
· Provides access for students who have successfully completed
specified high school courses (the core curriculum) and have demonstrated
by nationally normed test scores their ability to begin college level course
work.
Actively monitors and supports student progress toward educational and
career goals and success through student support programs, advising, co-curricular
activities, dynamic placement efforts, and a supportive campus learning
environment.
As described in its Statement of Institutional Identity, the University
"monitors student progress and evaluates learning by a campus-wide assessment
program in general education, writing competency, and the major fields
of study." Other areas of concern include information about student development,
enrollment and retention patterns, and the general campus learning environment
as it relates to student academic achievement.
Areas of Assessment: Current and Projected Activities
To guide the collection and review of relevant information, the Assessment
Review Committee has defined nine critical areas of assessment. The first
three areas focus on academic programs (the undergraduate major, general
education, and graduate studies). Areas four and five focus on off-campus
learning and the general campus learning environment. Areas six through
nine cut across the first five areas, suggesting specific cohorts of students
about whom assessment information is to be collected. For each area, the
Committee has identified units responsible for collecting assessment information
and summarized current and planned assessment activities.
Area One: Student achievement in the undergraduate major
Colleges and academic departments have primary responsibility for assessing
their majors. Academic departments are encouraged to use a variety of assessment
methods. Twenty out of thirty-two departments require a nationally normed
test in the major. All education students take CBASE when applying for
the program and the NTE subject matter test when exiting from the program.
All business students take the MFAT Business exam. Certain programs (Accounting,
Recreation, Athletic Training, Medical Technology, and Nursing) look at
performance on certification exams. Four departments use locally developed
objective tests of knowledge mastery. In 1993 six departments used performance
based assessments such as portfolios in capstone courses or juried art
shows and more are planning to incorporate this approach into their existing
assessment plans. Four departments conduct senior exit interviews, and
other departments, noting their usefulness, are considering doing likewise.
All departments track special student achievements (awards in national
and state competitions, student papers presented at national and state
meetings, student publications, etc.). As of 1993, four departments conscientiously
tracked job placement rates and post-graduate study acceptance rates as
part of their assessment plans. Twelve departments conduct their own follow-up
on departmental alumni.
A review of departmental assessment activities was conducted in Fall
1993. The Academic Associate to the Provost, serving in the absence of
the Director of Assessment (ACE Fellowship leave, 1993-94), interviewed
all departmental chairpersons. The results of the interview were reported
to the Assessment Review Committee. (Appendix 4, Inventory of Departmental
Assessment Activities, 1993-94).
Consequently, the Committee approved the following six objectives for
continued development of assessment in the major.
-
Within the next academic year departments will begin to report assessment
information and activities in Annual Departmental Reports as part of the
regular planning and departmental review process.
-
In 1994-95, all departments will be asked to submit revised assessment
plan documents to the Assessment Review Committee for approval (Appendix
5. Components of Revised Departmental Assessment Plans).
-
In Spring 1995, the Assessment Review Committee will implement an annual
graduating senior survey.
-
The Assistant Provost, Director of Career Planning and Placement, and Assessment
Review Committee will seek ways to improve the data-base on job placement
and graduate school acceptance rates.
-
The Assistant Provost and representatives on the Assessment Review Committee
will help departments develop methods for summarizing and reporting results
of internship evaluations.
-
Use of performance-based assessments such as portfolios and senior capstone
course projects will be encouraged.
Area Two: Student achievement in general education (University Studies).
The School of University Studies and faculty teaching University Studies
courses have primary responsibility for assessing the University's general
education program. The objectives of University Studies provide a focus
for assessment in general education. Sources and techniques used to gather
assessment information include the following:
Writing Proficiency Exams All entering freshmen take a holistically
scored essay exam. Students are tested once again upon exiting the capstone
English composition course with a two part essay exam. A third test of
writing proficiency, also consisting of two parts, is required of all students
after they complete seventy-five credit hours. Students must demonstrate
competency on this test or, if they fail, on an approved portfolio option,
in order to graduate. Part One calls for a personal essay. Part Two calls
for a source-based analytic essay on a related topic. The requirement has
been in place since 1985.
Nationally Normed Exams of General Education Annually the short
form of Academic Profile is administered to a convenience sample of freshmen
in Fall and juniors and seniors in Spring. Comparison of freshmen with
upper-division scores provides evidence of improvement in basic general
education skills from the freshmen through the upper-division years. Comparisons
with norming groups indicate that students at Southeast are much like students
at comparative institutions. The test, however, has not provided information
useful for program improvement, and the School of University Studies intends
to explore alternative approaches to collecting nationally normed data
on general education.
Aggregated Student Course Evaluations In Spring 1994, all faculty
used the IDEA student evaluation form. In GS101 (University Studies freshmen
seminar) ratings were requested for each of the nine general education
objectives. It is planned to use objective-based ratings in all courses
to determine student perceptions of their progress on each of these objectives
by course and course cluster in the University Studies curriculum.
Surveys Items related to University Studies objectives are included
on the Graduate Follow-Up Survey and enrolled student surveys. A special
survey form devoted to oral communication skills has been developed. A
Graduating Senior Survey was piloted in Spring 1994 and will include items
related to University Studies when it is administered again in Spring 1995.
Objective-Oriented Scoring of Writing Exams Rubrics specific
to selected University Studies objectives will be used to assess student
performance on Part Two of the Writing Proficiency Exam. Rubrics have been
developed for critical thinking, reasoning, and analysis (similar to rubrics
for essays on the GMAT and the ETS Tasks in Critical Thinking). A team
of instructors in Ethics and Business have written a rubric for the ethical
analysis of cases in business ethics which can be generalized to the University
Studies valuing objective.
Samples of Student Work The University Studies Planning and Assessment
Committee will set up a five year plan to analyze samples of student work
in the upperdivision, interdisciplinary component of University Studies
relative to the nine objectives.
Analysis of "Found" Data Already existing information on student
behaviors relevant to University Studies objectives needs have been identified.
A new student tracking file will enable analysis of course-taking patterns
within University Studies by major, GPA, ACT, and other variables. Academic
departments and units within Student Affairs can provide information on
student involvement in community service (a measure of responsible functioning
in the natural, social, and political environment). Other possible sources
of data include statistics on use of the library, the Writing Center, the
University Museum, and attendance at cultural events.
The University Studies Council approved a University Studies assessment
plan in Fall 1993. Some of the elements of the plan are indicated above.
Specifically, the following recommendations were made:
-
Create a standing University Studies Planning and Assessment Committee
to oversee and develop assessment in University Studies,
-
Redefine existing administrative positions in University Studies to create
a new position of Director of Assessment and Planning for University Studies
-
Expand the use of aggregated analysis of student course ratings of progress
on general education objectives to all University Studies courses
-
Explore the use of writing proficiency exams for assessment of critical
thinking
-
Initiate a four-year cycle of assessment of University Studies objectives
based on external evaluation of student performance in upper-division University
Studies courses.
In keeping with Southeast's philosophy of assessment, assessment activities
in University Studies will be targeted at program improvement.
Area Three: Student achievement in graduate programs.
Primary responsibility for assessment of graduate programs belongs to
the academic departments in which they are housed, supported by the School
of Graduate Studies and Extended Learning. Some graduate programs have
access to external assessments. For example, graduate students in school
administration participate in the Missouri administrators assessment process,
and communication disorders students take a licensure exam. GRE scores
are required for admission to graduate programs in education. All graduate
students must be formally advanced to degree candidacy on the basis of
GPA midway to completion of their program, and all students must complete
either a research project and comprehensive written exam or a thesis and
oral exam, which are evaluated by a committee of graduate faculty.
Planned developments in assessment of graduate programs include
the following:
-
Beginning in the Spring 1995, all students completing graduate degrees
will be asked to participate in an exit assessment of student satisfaction
and future plans for employment or education.
-
All graduate programs will be included in the 1994-95 call for revised
departmental assessment plans.
Area Four. Success of off-campus and transfer programs.
Responsibility for assessing off-campus and transfer students is distributed
across the institution. The Missouri Student Achievement Study provides
data on students transferring into and out of the University within the
state of Missouri. The Writing Outcomes Program has done comparative studies
of transfer versus non-transfer student performance on the Writing Proficiency
Test. Most off-campus students also attend courses on campus and are assessed
by departments in their major. Students in the University's 2+2 Nursing
program are assessed along with all other nursing students. The IDEA student
course rating form provides aggregated data about performance of off-campus
courses. The Bootheel Educational Center analyzes enrollment patterns in
its Annual Report and has conducted surveys of students and business and
industry in its region. Needs assessments at the BEC are conducted annually
by the BEC staff.
Planned developments in the assessment of off-campus and transfer programs
include the following:
-
A student tracking file integrated with the student record system (developed
by the Student Information System Task Force, Spring-Fall 1994) will provide
improved access to information about off-campus and transfer students.
-
Success of University\community college articulation agreements will be
monitored through surveys and focus groups.
Area Five: Quality of the general campus learning environment, including
access, student satisfaction, and cultural and extracurricular activities.
Responsibility for assessing the quality of the campus learning environment
is shared among divisions, with support and guidance from the Office of
the Provost and the Office of Institutional Research. The alumni surveys
and enrolled student surveys primarily address questions about student
satisfaction. The quality improvement program within the Division of Finance
and Administration seeks information related to student needs. The Division
of Student Affairs maintains an ongoing concern with the quality of student
life (Appendix 6, Campus Learning Environment Inventory of Assessment Activities).
It is anticipated that the Graduating Senior Survey and periodic enrolled
student surveys will target specific aspects of the campus learning environment.
Area Six: Information about knowledge, skills, aptitudes, attitudes,
values, and achievements of entering and prospective students.
Freshmen baseline information cuts across areas one, two, four, and
five. Data on ACTS, high school GPA’s, high school rank, completion of
core curriculum, etc., are reported in the Missouri Student Achievement
Study, and shared with faculty and administrators. Data on placement tests,
such as the Writing Placement test, are kept in a test file from which
they can be accessed for assessment purposes. The CIRP provides demographic
and attitudinal information about entering freshmen. The short form of
Academic Profile, a test of general education, has been taken every fall
by a sample of beginning freshmen. IDEA instructional evaluation in GS101
provides additional information about perceptions of freshmen.
Area Seven: Information about enrollment and retention.
Enrollment and retention information cuts across areas one, two, four,
and five. The Assistant Vice President for Enrollment Management produces
periodic reports on enrollment and course-taking patterns. The Office of
Institutional Research produces reports on retention and persistence rates.
The College Student Inventory is being piloted as an instrument for identifying
students at risk. Project Recovery assesses the effect of intervention
efforts in improving retention. The newly formed Enrollment Development
Task Force will continue to seek information related to enrollment and
retention.
Area Eight. Information about the knowledge, skills, aptitudes,
perceptions, prospects, and achievements of graduating seniors.
All academic departments collect assessment information (for example,
exit interviews, scores on nationally normed or locally developed tests,
special achievements, medical school acceptance rates) about their graduating
seniors. The Graduating Senior Survey will provide additional information
about the prospects and perceptions of graduating seniors.
Area Nine: Information about employment, post-graduate education,
achievements, and perceptions of graduates.
The alumni follow-up survey has been conducted since 1983. Several departments
maintain contact with their graduates through departmental newsletters.
The University participates in periodic CBHE surveys of alumni and employers.
Future plans include revision of current institutional survey procedures
and increased emphasis on departmental follow-up on graduates.
Coordination and Oversight
Responsibilities for administration of assessment are decentralized. In
general, the units closest to the delivery of programs have primary responsibility
for design, implementation, and use of assessments. With the exception
of institution-wide studies, such as the alumni survey, individual units
within the Divisions of Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, and Finance
and Administration plan and conduct assessment activities tailored to their
particular needs. Though decentralized, assessment is integrated into planning
and program review and evaluated for effectiveness at the institutional
level. The Assessment Review Committee, including faculty, student, and
divisional representatives, has become a standing committee for coordination
and oversight of the assessment program. The Committee is charged with
annually evaluating the state of the assessment program at Southeast. Chaired
by a faculty member, the Committee reports to the Provost. To emphasize
integration of program review and assessment, responsibility for the assessment
program within the Provost's Office has been assigned to the Assistant
Provost. The position of Director of Assessment has been eliminated. Within
Academic Affairs, all departments now prepare annual departmental reports
which are expected to include an assessment component describing assessment
activities. Annual reports are reviewed by chairpersons, deans, and the
Office of the Provost. Since its inception, the Office of Institutional
Research has produced external and internal reports and provided support
for data management. Anticipating an enhanced role for Institutional Research
in assessment and planning, a search for a new Director of Institutional
Research has been launched to replace the former Coordinator. Finally,
assessment results are reported regularly to Administrative Council, which
is chaired by the President of the University. (Appendix 7, Coordination
and Oversight Appendix 8: Organization).
Implementation of Assessment Program
The Outcomes Assessment Plan approved by the Board of Regents in 1987 mandated
assessment in general education, all academic majors, and teacher education.
It also recommended that the plan be reviewed and revised as necessary.
The Assessment Review Committee appointed in 1992 undertook this task.
Its recommendations acknowledge certain ongoing activities in departments
and colleges as valid components of assessment and focus attention on the
need for further development and refinement of procedures for assessing
academic programs and the general learning environment (for example, the
standardization of departmental assessment plans and implementation of
a graduating senior survey). Therefore, the timeline for implementation
of assessment at Southeast indicates planned changes resulting from a collegial
review of an existing program. Since the new Assessment Review Committee
is charged with continuous monitoring of assessment activities and results,
it can be expected that changes in assessment procedures will occur regularly.
Forces external to the institution will also give shape to assessment in
sometimes unpredictable ways. For example, by participating in a CBHE project
on Funding for Results, supported now by a FIPSE grant awarded in Fall
1994, the University has committed to developing a local approach to assessment
that facilitates the improvement of teaching and learning. The details
of this approach cannot be worked out before FY96 and would not be implemented
before FY97. In any case, many of the activities described here will continue,
as will procedures for sharing the results of assessment, such as the Annual
Departmental Report and ad hoc reports to Administrative Council. A general
review of the assessment program will be conducted in FY98. Appendix 9
contains the current timeline for enacting proposed changes in the program.
Use of Assessment for Continuous Improvement
The guiding principles of Southeast's assessment program clearly specify
that assessment is to be motivated, informed, and evaluated in terms of
its contribution to continuous program ' improvement. Though it is understood
that the results of assessment will typically indicate that programs are
functioning satisfactorily, it is also expected that changes in curriculum,
instruction, and practices will result from assessment efforts. The process
of assessment can itself improve the quality of teaching and learning by
bringing faculty together to articulate shared standards and expectations
(for example, when a department agrees on rubrics for scoring a performance-based
assessment procedure) or by improving communication between faculty and
students (for example, when a department conducts exit interviews). The
results of assessment can help to identify, components of the curriculum
that need to be strengthened (for example, when a subscore on a nationally
normed exam indicates that students are relatively weak in that area) or
demonstrate that an effort to improve has succeeded (for example, when
data show that retention rates have increased or failure rates on a writing
exam have decreased).
Longitudinal assessments have been used to demonstrate that in certain
skill areas students at Southeast improve over time. The average writing
proficiency score of cohorts tracked through the University's three-tiered
writing assessment program increases significantly, and comparison of freshmen
with upper-division student scores on Academic Profile suggests that students
improve in key areas of general education at a level equivalent to students
at comparative institutions. But, like Peter Ewell ("Back to the Future."
Change, November 1991, pages 4-8), the Assessment Review Committee has
found that the use of these and other assessment data for program improvement
has not been either dramatic or extensive. Nevertheless, we can cite several
instances in which assessment has led to positive changes. When early results
from the writing assessment program suggested that students in EN 1 40
were not receiving focused instruction on essay writing in writing-on-:demand
situations, the English department conducted a full-day workshop on holistic
scoring for all composition instructors. Subsequently, a 32.6% failure
rate on Writing Proficiency Exit exam was reduced to 20.7% and then to
17%. Results from the seventy-five hour writing proficiency test led to
the creation of a portfolio-oriented upper-division composition course
for students requiring additional instruction in basic writing skills.
Based on an analysis of subscores on licensure exams, Nursing and Human
Environmental Studies revised curricula within their departments. The Department
of Mass Communication revised its curriculum based on information collected
in senior exit interviews. The Department of Art reexamined drawing components
of its curriculum in response to evaluations of an external judge for a
senior art exhibition. Evaluations by a faculty workgroup of student writing
in University Studies interdisciplinary courses led to publication of student
and faculty guidelines for writing assignments in all such courses. A major
thrust in the revision of departmental assessment plans is to increase
emphasis on the collection and use of information that supports continuous
program improvement.
APPENDIX 1
(Approved by Board of Regents May 1987)
OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY
I. University Studies (General Education) - Designated by the Regents
as a Premier Program of the University.
1 . Fall 1986 and each succeeding semester: administer to all freshmen
to provide baseline date for comparison with ACT COMP.
B.
1 . Spring 1987, Fall 1987, Spring 1988: administer to sample of seniors
and sophomores to provide data base for comparison of present General Education
with new University Studies program.
C. Institutionally Developed Instruments
Focusing on the program's nine General Objectives and three Perspectives,
outcomes measures are to be incorporated into the design of each course
approved by the University Studies Committee. The Director of University
Studies shall coordinate the assessment procedures so that appropriate
summary results are available for the program as a whole.
II. Writing Across the Curriculum (Already University policy).
A. Students without credit in English composition applicable to a degree
at Southeast Missouri State University are required to take the English
Writing Skills Placement Test administered by the Department of English.
On the basis of this test, students are placed in the appropriate developmental
or college-level composition course or (if the score is high enough) may
be given credit for EN100 English Composition I or/and EN150 English Composition
II.
B. Students entering the University during the 1985-86 academic year
or thereafter are required to pass a test of writing competence after they
have completed 75 semester hours of credit. This test is administered by
the Writing Outcomes Program. A passing score on this test is a requirement
for graduation and is applicable to all baccalaureate degrees.
III. All Academic Majors
A. Fall 1987 (Pilot Testing): Norm-referenced evaluation process that
Fall 1988 (Fully Implemented): allows for national/regional comparisons.
B. Fall 1987 (Pilot Testing): Evaluation based on programmatic goals
as Fall 1988 (Fully Implemented): defined by academic departments, using
(as appropriate) locally developed tests, performance evaluations, alumni
surveys, etc.-any combination of techniques that may assist in determining
whether a department's objectives for education of its majors are being
successfully met.
IV. Teacher Education- Designated by the Regents as a Premier Program of
the University.
V. Follow-up Studies of Alumni
The University will annually seek external judgment of its contribution
to the intellectual and personal development of alumni through survey research.
VI. Review: The assessment plan adopted by the University shall be monitored
by this task force or by another body established for that purpose; at
intervals no longer than five years, the plan shall be thoroughly reviewed,
and modified as necessary, to insure that it continues to serve the purposes
for which it was instituted.
APPENDIX 2
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY
STUDENT ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLES
The overall concept of assessment includes attempts to identify ways in
which university experiences, both formal and informal, affect students.
The primary purpose of academic assessment is to measure student academic
achievement and to identify program success. Academic assessment includes
attempts to document student achievement in the area of general academic
abilities and in their specific academic program areas.
Academic assessment involves both assessment for program improvement
and for accountability. As a state institution of higher education, Southeast
Missouri State University has a responsibility to document student achievement.
The major focus in the design of assessment processes should be the generation
of information that is useful in identifying changes that will lead to
program improvements that will in turn enhance student achievement.
The faculty had the primary responsibility for the design, implementation,
and evaluation of processes designed to assess student achievement. In
designing the assessment process, faculty should have the maximum flexibility
in selecting the assessment procedures that, in their professional judgment,
are not appropriate for the curriculum.
It is essential that assessment employs multiple measures. No one instrument
is sufficiently complex to capture the range of student achievement necessary
to make a judgment regarding how well a program is functioning.
Assessment is an integral part of the program and department review
process. Results from assessment should raise questions about ways in which
improvements can be made. Assessment data should be shared openly with
faculty and administrators.
The assessment process should be designed to collect information concerning
student achievement in the least intrusive ways possible. Students should
not be subjected to large numbers of paper and pencil tests from which
they see little benefit. Since assessment is intended to be beneficial
to students, students should be aware of methods of assessment in use on
campus. Where feasible, assessment results should be provided to individual
students on a timely basis. Individual student results on assessment measures
should be treated in such a way as to ensure student privacy.
April 20, 1992
Pauline Fox,
Director Academic Assessment
APPENDIX 3
ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE 1992-1994
| Doug Atwood |
Department of Psychology (Committee Chair) |
| Debbie Beard |
Department of Accounting and Finance |
| Margaret Brickhaus |
Computer Center |
| Max Drake |
Department of Sociology and Anthropology |
| Ray Ewing |
Department of Speech Communication and Theatre |
| Pauline Fox |
Provost's Office (Director of Assessment, Member in 1992-1993) |
| Dennis Holt |
Provost's Office (Academic Associate, Member in 1993-94) |
| Jerry McAllister |
Department of Elementary and Special Education |
| Ray Pensel |
Registrar's Office |
| Linda Rabold |
Campus Assistance Center |
| Harry Schuler |
Student Support Services |
| Art Soellner |
Department of Physics |
| Kevin Squibb |
Department of Communication Disorders |
APPENDIX 4
INVENTORY OF DEPARTMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES, 1993-94
Nationally Normed Tests
| Accounting |
MFAT, FACIT, all majors |
| Administrative Services |
MFAT, BSBA; NTE, CBASE, BSED |
| Biology |
MFAT, BS, BSED; NTE, BSED |
| Chemistry |
MFAT, BS, BSED; NTE, BSED |
| Communication Disorders |
NTE, only students seeking state certification |
| Economics |
MFAT, recommended |
| Elementary & Special Education |
NTE, CBASE |
| English |
NTE, BSED; MFAT |
| Foreign Languages |
NTE, BSED |
| Geosciecnces |
NTE, BSED |
| History |
NTE, Social Studies; MFAT, History |
| Human Environmental Studies |
National Home Economics Test, recommended |
| Management |
MFAT, all majors |
| Marketing |
MFAT, all majors |
| Mathematics |
MFAT, BS; NTE, BSED |
| Music |
MFAT, all graduating seniors; NTE, BMED |
| Philosophy and Religion |
GRE or LSAT, all graduating seniors |
| Physical Education |
NTE, CBASE |
| Physics |
MFAT, BS |
| Political Science |
MFAT, recommended |
| Sociology & Anthronpology |
MFAT |
| Secondary Education |
NTE, CBASE |
| Social Work |
Area Concentration Achievement Test (2nd Semester of Senior Year) |
| Speech Communication |
NTE, BSED |
20 Departments require a nationally normed test of some or all of their
graduating seniors. 3 departments recommend a nationally normed test to
some or all of their graduating seniors (35 total departments). All graduates
seeking a BSED, BMED, or BVHED must take the NTE. All graduates seeking
a BSBA must take the MFAT.
Certification/Licensure Exams
| Accounting |
CPA exam, accouting; Real Estate Brokerage, Finance |
| Chemistry |
National Registry Exam, Medical Technology |
| Communication Disorders |
National Examination of Speech Pathology, gradaute students only |
| Health & Leisure |
NCTRC, therapeutic recreaction; NAAT, athletic trainers, American College
of Sports Medicince Exercise Test Technologist, Cooper Institute Certification,
health promotion; IDEA, dance exercise, Certified Leisure Professional |
| Human Environmental Studies |
NCIDQ, interior design majors |
| Nursing |
NCLEX, BSN, & AA |
6 departments expect some or all of their graduates to take a national
certification/licensure exam. All majors in accounting, medical technology,
and nursing are required to take a national certification exam.
Local Objective Tests
| Agriculture |
All graduating seniors |
| Health & Leisure |
Pre and Post Exam for all majors |
| Psychology |
Administered for first time in Fall 93, discontinued MFAT as of Spring
94 |
| Criminal Justice |
Strongly encouraged |
4 departments have developed and use their own objective test of achievement.
Performance Based Assessments
Active or Partially Implemented:
| Art |
Juried Portfolio and Show |
| Foreign Language |
Exit Portfolio |
| History |
Juried senior seminar research project, History; historic preservation,
portfolio planned |
| Industrial Technology |
Capstone course senior project |
| Mass Communications |
External review of capstone experience projects |
| Music |
Juried evaluation of musical performance, piano proficiency evaluation,
senior recitals and exit performance; portfolio planned |
| Speech Communication and Theatre |
Review of speaking skills, speech; juried review of play direction. |
Planned or Under Development:
| English |
Writing students, portfolio |
| Philosophy and Religion |
Senior paper |
| Psychology |
Portfolio |
| Secondary Education |
Portfolio |
6 departments use performance based assessments such as portfolios and
senior capstone projects. 4 departments are planning to use performance
based assessments.
Exit Interviews or Surveys
| Criminal Justice |
Survey |
| Foreign Language |
Interview |
| Harrison College of Business |
Recent graduate survey, every term, all departments |
| Mass Communications |
Interview |
| Psychology |
Interview |
| Social Work |
Survey |
4 departments conduct exit interviews or surveys of graduating seniors.
(Note: a campus wide survey of graduating seniors is planned for Spring
1994.)
Internship Evaluations
| Agriculture |
|
| Administrative Services |
Office Systems Managemnet, business and faculty evaluators |
| Health & Leisure |
Internship Employee Assessment & Research Project for all majors
in internships |
| History |
All Historic Preservation majors |
| Mass Communications |
Selected students only |
| Political Science |
Exit interview with supervisor, 30-40% of all students |
| Elementary and Special Education |
Block I Exit Interviews |
| Secondary Education |
Block I, II, III, & IV exit evaluations |
| Social Work |
Senior level internships |
8 departments have information available to them about student performance
in internships.
Job Placement Rates
Active or Partially Implemented:
Agriculture
Communication Disorders
Industrial Technology
Nursing
Social Work
Planned:
Foreign Language
4 departments formally maintain job placement rates. One department
plans to do so.
Graduate/Medical/Law School Acceptance Rates
Active or Partially Implemented:
| Philosophy |
Graduate school and law school |
| Biology |
Medical school |
| Chemistry |
Medical technolgy programs |
| Economics |
Graduate School |
Planned or Under Development:
Foreign Language
4 departments formally maintain graduate/medical/law school acceptance
rates. One department plans to do so.
Alumni Follow-Up
| Accounting |
Survey, 1992-93 |
| Chemistry |
Newsletter |
| College of Education |
Beginning Teacher Newsletter |
| Elementary & Special Education |
Newsletter |
| English |
Periodic Survey |
| Geosciences |
Newsletter |
| Harrison College of Business |
All alumni, every five years, all departments\Newsletter |
| Health & Leisure |
Newsletter |
| History |
Occasionally with newsletter |
| Mass Comunications |
Every 4 to 5 semesters, 40% return rate |
| Music |
Satisfaction questionnaire, planned |
| Nursing |
Survey, 93-94; phone contact |
| Physical Education |
Newsletter |
| Psychology |
Fall 1993 |
| Social Work |
Roughly every two years |
11 departments maintain contact with alumni through newsletters or surveys.
The Harrison College of Business conducts a college-level survey.
Other
| Agriculture |
Employer/Faculty/Alumni Advisory Committee |
| Educational Administration & Counseling |
Post-masters and EDS students take the Missouri Admnistrators Assessment |
| Human Environmental Studies |
Instructor and nursery school teacher evaluations, child development |
| Industrial Technolgy |
Departmental Advisory Committee includes employers of graduates |
| Political Science |
Pre and post tests in comparative political systems and US political
systems |
APPENDIX 5
COMPONENTS OF REVISED DEPARTMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLANS
Departmental assessment plans provide a framework for assessment of academic
programs. For each of its major programs, departments will develop brief
statements addressing the following three questions:
1. What are the program's desired student outcomes?
2. What means does the department use to assess attainment of these
outcomes?
3. What departmental structures and processes are in place to ensure
that results of assessment are used for program improvement?
APPENDIX 6
CAMPUS LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: INVENTORY OF ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
Some examples of recent and continuing assessment within this area are:
| Institutional Alumni Survey |
Academic Affairs, continuing |
| Institutional Enrolled Student Survey |
Academic Affairs, 92-93 |
| CBHE ACT College Outcomes Survey |
Academic Affairs, CBHE, 93-94 |
| College Student Inventory |
Student Affairs, piloted Fall 93 |
| CIRP Report |
Office of the Registrar, biennially |
| Student Health & Counseling Evaluations |
Center for Health and Counseling, Spring 94 |
| Project Recovery |
Student Development, longitudinal study
of students at risk, Spring 93-Continuing |
| Graduating Senior Survey |
Career Planning and Placement,
Academic Assessment, piloted Spring 94 |
| Noel-Levitz |
On campus consultants, student focus
groups, Fall 93 |
| URES |
Residence life survey, Spring 94 |
| Financial Aids Survey |
Financial Aids Office, Spring 94 |
| Student Study Time Survey |
Conducted by a team of students in Methods of Social Science Research,
Spring 94 |
APPENDIX 7
COORDINATION & OVERSIGHT: POSITIONS, REPORTS, COMMITTEES
ASSESSMENT POSITIONS
Assistant Provost. TheAssistantProvostisa.5FTE positonintheOfficeoftheProvost.TheAssistant
Provost reports to the Provost and assists with program review, new program
approval processes, special academic projects (for example, computerization
& experiential learning), and the assessment program.
Director of Institutional Research. The Director of Institutional
Research is a full-time position. Head of the Office of Institutional Research,
the Director is assisted by a full time institutional research analyst.
The Office of Institutional Research produces external and internal reports
and provides data management support. The Director of Institutional Research
reports to the Provost.
Director of Assessment and Planning, University Studies. The
Director of Assessment and Planning in the School of University Studies
coordinates assessment in general education. (Position created through
restructuring in the School of University Studies.)
ASSESSMENT REPORTS
A student tracking file integrated with the student record system
(developed by the Student Information System Task Force, Spring-Fall 1994)
should improve access to information about off-campus and transfer students.
Adoption of a standard course evaluation form for all classes should provide
a means for obtaining aggregated data about off-campus courses.
Ad Hoc Reports. Results of special assessment activities are
reported in meetings of Administrative Council, Deans Council, College
Council, Student Affairs Council, and other collegial bodies.
Accent on Assessment A newsletter distributed campus-wide. Contains
information about developments and trends in assessment and summaries of
results of assessment.
Annual Departmental Reports. As of FY94, all academic departments
prepare annual reports containing an assessment component. The reports
are submitted to the college dean for review and shared with the office
of the Provost.
COMMITTEES & COUNCILS
Assessment Review Committee. Created as an ad hoc committee in
1992 to evaluate and revise the University's assessment plan, the Assessment
Review Committee became a standing committee in Fall 1994 and reports to
the Provost.
Charge: To oversee, coordinate, and review implementation and administration
of the University's assessment plan.
Membership: A faculty representative from each college; a representative
of the School of University Studies; a representative of the School of
Graduate Studies and Extended Learning; a representative of Student Affairs;
a representative of Finance and Administration; an expert faculty consultant
(non-voting); student representatives; the Director of Institutional Research;
the Assistant Provost.
Members:
| 1994-95 |
Deborah Beard |
Harrison College of Business |
| 1994-97 |
Dalton Curtis |
College of Education |
| 1994-96 |
Michael Parker |
College of Health and Human Services |
| 1994-95 |
Doug Atwood |
College of Liberal Arts |
| 1994-97 |
Anthony Duben |
College of Science and Technology |
| 1994-96 |
Sheila Caskey |
School of Graduate Studies and Extended Learning |
| 1994-96 |
Irene Ferguson |
Student Affairs |
| 1994-96 |
Al Stoverink |
Finance and Administration |
| 1994-96 |
Firooz Hekmat |
Expert Faculty Consultant (Marketing) |
| 1994-95 |
Ellen Brenneman |
Student Representative |
| 1994-95 |
Jason LeGrand |
Student Representative |
| N/R |
David Green |
School of University Studies, Director of Planning & Assessment |
| N/R |
Unfilled |
Director of Institutional Research |
| N/R |
Dennis Holt |
Assistant Provost |
University Studies Assessment Committee. Approved by the University
Studies Council in Fall 1993, the University Studies Assessment Committee
is charged with advising the Director of Assessment and Planning in University
Studies on matters related to coordination, development, and review of
University Studies assessment activities. Membership includes representatives
from all colleges.
Student Affairs Assessment Committee. The Student Affairs Committee
is charged with overseeing assessment activities in Student Affairs. An
assessment plan for Student Affairs was developed and approved by the Committee
in Fall 1994. Membership includes representatives from all units with Student
Affairs.
University Planning Committee. The University Planning Committee
is charged with identifying and assessing progress towards institutional
goals and objectives. From November 1992 through March 1993, the Committee
undertook a midterm review of institutional goals and objectives for 1990-1995.
Among the goals evaluated was the implementation of a systematic assessment
plan for all University programs.
Administrative Council. Administrative Council is charged with
advising the President and sharing information about the operations and
activities of various administrative divisions of the University. Included
are representatives from all divisions, faculty senate, student government,
and the colleges and schools. |
