1 / 15

Draft of the Conceptual Framework for Evaluation & Assessment of the

Draft of the Conceptual Framework for Evaluation & Assessment of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Alliance for Graduate Education & the Professoriate (AGEP) Program Developed by Yolanda S. George, AAAS Education & Human Resources Programs and

amaris
Download Presentation

Draft of the Conceptual Framework for Evaluation & Assessment of the

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Draft of the Conceptual Framework for Evaluation & Assessment of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Alliance for Graduate Education & the Professoriate (AGEP) Program Developed by Yolanda S. George, AAAS Education & Human Resources Programs and Patricia Campbell, Campbell-Kibler Associates, Inc. With input from the AGEP Community

  2. The primary goal of the AGEP Program evaluation capacity building project is to: Help AGEP awardees to build a comprehensive evaluation and assessment infrastructure to examine their graduate education enterprise in terms of creating a diverse S&E PhD workforce.

  3. The evaluation framework and model for change are focused on graduate student affairs, including: Recruitment and talent spotting strategies. Admissions and selection processes. Financial aid, particularly as it affects new graduate student enrollment and retention. Academic preparation & support programs, particularly during the early course-taking years. Advising, mentoring, and retention. Workforce preparation. PhD career counseling and employment placement.

  4. Key Administrators Using Evaluation & Assessment to Make informed Decisions Graduate School and Academic Deans Provosts and Other Administrators S&E Department Chairs S&E Departmental Admissions and Selection Committees S&E Departmental Graduate Program Directors or Advisors S&E Faculty

  5. Collection And Use Of Disaggregated Data Race/Ethnicity Gender Citizenship S&E Departments

  6. Quantitative data should be used to examine patterns and trends in number and percentage of: UM applicants & admits New or first time UM enrollees; Overall UM enrollment; UM students advancing to doctoral candidacy; UM students completing degrees (Master’s or PhD). Post PhD Employment

  7. Indicators of Infrastructure Changes in Graduate Programs Number and percentage of S&E departments involved Number of S&E faculty involved Number of S&E faculty involved in graduate student recruitment. S&E departmental practices related to graduate student admissions and selection. S&E departmental practices related to academic preparation, advising and workforce mentoring S&E departmental practices related to faculty evaluation and incentives. Family leave policies and practices within the graduate school or departments. As related to graduate students. Data collection practices, particularly use of disaggregated data, at the in decision-making.

  8. Also, data and information need to be collected on The quality of the implementation including participants’ and/or external reviewers’ perceptions about the intended objectives of a workshop or program component. Time-on-task The effectiveness of the interventions or to what extent did the intervention achieve its intended objectives.

  9. Quantitative and qualitative studies about policies, practices, and programs in the Graduate School & S&E departments should be used to determine What is working and not working What works for whom.

  10. Using the meeting to begin to reflect on infrastructure changes in graduate schools How building a comprehensive evaluation and assessment infrastructure How to better work with institutional researchers, other campus research units, external evaluator How to involve S & E departments

  11. Strand 1 --Building a data collection infrastructure related to graduate students and their progression to the PhD. AGEP Program Director will review Expectations NSF HRD Evaluation Office & Performance Assessment Lessons Learned by Some AGEP Institutions

  12. Strand 2Retention & Progress to the PhD CGS PhD Completion Project Working with STEM departments and faculty to ensure retention in PhD programs, particularly during the first years of graduate school Strategies for helping students to be successful on qualifying exams Strategies to reduce time to degree

  13. Strand 3 Assessing recruitment and departmental admissions/selections efforts.

  14. Other Agenda Elements Foundation & Discipline Perspectives NSF Director Using WebCASPAR Update on AGEP Data Collection NSF Director

  15. In Summary This is a community effort. The framework is evolving This is not an easy journey, neither is it one that can be completed quickly

More Related