|
1. What this Innovative Practice does and how it works.
A process was created through which academic departments and program chairs could create meaningful assessment plans for their academic majors.
2. What motivated us to develop or adopt this Innovative Practice.
Several previous attempts by the faculty Academic Programs Assessment Committee to help departments improve departmental assessment had yielded only partially successful results.
Furthermore, departments and were viewing the process as an externally-driven reporting demand rather than something relevant to their own program reviews.
3. How long it took us to develop and implement this Innovative Practice.
It took an academic year to research successful practices at other institutions and tailor those to fit our own situation.
It was readily apparent that many faculty were confused and frustrated by the committee’s guidelines revised annually in an attempt to clarify expectations.
It was important to take a step back from previous practice and abandon assessment vocabulary and instructions that were not understood.
The new model that was created clarified the steps needed to reach the end goal of a sustainable assessment plan for each department.
The new model was presented in a series of workshops, but departments were only expected to complete the first steps within the next academic year.
Discrete steps were added over the next two years and explained by means of annual workshops.
Departments received annual feedback on their submitted plans and in some cases individual departments consulted with committee members.
Now that all steps of the model have been implemented, the committee meets with individual departments to confirm good practices in place and problem-solve where departments have run into obstacles.
4. What it cost us to develop and implement this Innovative Practice.
Costs include conferences for committee members to learn about assessment practices, and purchase of assessment resources (books).
The primary cost is time.
5. What resistance we faced in developing and implementing this Innovative Practice, and how we reduced or overcome it.
In recent years we have encountered less resistance to the principle of assessment than we had in the past.
The committee has stressed departmental autonomy in articulating program outcomes and means of assessing those outcomes to allay fears that faculty are losing control of how they teach and design their programs.
We have also worked to educate faculty on the value of assessment for their work.
Once faculty have outlined assessment practices that would yield data relevant to students’ performance on their major’s learning outcomes, the primary obstacle is time.
Small departments in a small college with many teaching and service expectations may perceive assessment to be an additional burden. On the other hand, we have also received comments from departments that the process of articulating learning outcomes, mapping those to their curriculum, and analyzing where and how well those outcomes are being addressed and achieved has stimulated helpful departmental discussion and brought about improvements.
6. What it costs us to maintain and operate this Innovative Practice, and what it saves us.
No budget is reserved for this activity.
The primary investment is human resources (time) which varies by department.
7. How we measure or check whether this Innovative Practice performs the way we intend it to.
The committee tracks aggregate progress of departments with the chart attached.
It also solicits feedback from departments.
8. Print or web documents available that provide more detail and explanation about this Innovative Practice.
Attached is a copy of the document we use to track the progress we have made toward helping departments close the assessment loop.
9. How our organization currently uses this Innovative Practice.
Chairs of academic departments and interdisciplinary majors submit annual assessment plans and results. The assessment committee provides feedback and meets with departments to refine their next steps, as described in #3.
10. Whom one should contact at our institution for more information or help
about this Innovative Practice.
Dr. Chad Ray
Professor of Philosophy
Chair, Academic Programs Assessment Committee
641-628-5213 |
Innovation Exchange
Home
| 
Sign Up | 
Glossary | 
Contact Us | 
Help 
Assessment of Departmental Academic Programs
File Attachments
Related innovative practices
Search the Innovation Exchange