A ssessment at San Juan College

1. Assessmentat San Juan College Presented to the AQIP quality check-up Team February 1, 2007 by Andi Penner, chair, assessment committee and Lisa Wilson, Dean, School of Humanities

2. Assessmentis the process whereby we systematically collect and analyze information to understand and improve student learning.

3. Assessment at SJC A context for the conversation to follow: • AQIP Criterion 1 • Common Student Learning Outcomes (CSLOs) • Levels of Assessment • Artifacts • HLC Assessment Academy • NM State Task Force on Assessment

4. Reviewing the Orbit or•bit n. definition 2. range or sphere of action. At SJC, we have long incorporated classroom, course, and program assessment of student learning outcomes into our institutional plan with the goal of improving both teaching and learning.

5. AQIP has helped us focus Assessment on Student Learning AQIP Criterion One: Helping Students Learn 1C1 What common student learning outcomes do you hold for all students (regardless of their status or program of study), and what pattern of knowledge and skills do you expect them to possess upon completion of their general and specialized studies?

6. A Brief History of Time • Responding to AQIP guidelines, a workgroup met during summer 2003 to draft institutional learning outcomes…. • In fall 2003, “Meeting of the Minds” attendees made further draft recommendations….

7. ….cont’d • Fall 2003: Quality Student Learning Council and faculty refined the 5 Common Student Learning Outcomes. • Jan. 2004: President approves CSLOs. • Fall 2004: CSLOs included in all course syllabi and part of institutional culture.

8. The World of CSLOsSJC’s 5 Common Student Learning Outcomes Learn Students will actively and independently acquire, apply and adapt skills and knowledge to develop expertise and a broader understanding of the world as lifelong learners. Think Students will think analytically and creatively to explore ideas, make connections, draw conclusions, and solve problems. Communicate Students will exchange ideas and information with clarity and originality in multiple contexts. Integrate Students will demonstrate proficiency in the use of technologies in the broadest sense related to their field of study. Act Students will act purposefully, reflectively, and respectfully in diverse and complex environments.

9. Classroom Assessment • Each faculty member seeks to analyze his or her teaching effectiveness, or to measure student learning of specific outcomes in a particular class. • Typical methods include: • CATs (Classroom Assessment Techniques) • One-minute papers • Muddiest point • Response papers or “one-pagers” • Quizzes • Discussions • Small Group Feedback

10. Course Assessment • Faculty (often the lead instructors) seek to measure whether or not students across sections of the same course are achieving the stated outcomes. • Typical methods of assessment include: • Major papers or projects • Major speech or demonstration • Artwork or performance • Portfolios or exams • Capstone projects

11. Program Assessment • Chairs, program directors, coordinators, and/or faculty measure whether students have achieved the designated program outcomes. Outcomes will have been covered in a number of different courses within the curriculum. • Typical methods of assessment include: • Licensure exams • Practicum capstone projects • Portfolios • Performance or demonstration

12. Institutional Assessment • The Assessment Committee is charged with measuring student learning across disciplines and programs to determine whether we are ensuring that students are completing programs, certificates, or degrees while demonstrating their ability to Learn, Think, Communicate, Integrate, and Act. • Should we use a “one-size-fits-all” standardized exit exams or capstone courses required of every student?

13. Assessing the CSLOs CSLO Assessment at the Institutional level could involve: • Standardized competency exit exam for all students • Capstone project for all students • Capstone course required of all students • Or, Artifacts….

14. The Artifact Model • After reviewing the options, the SJC Assessment Committee has selected the artifact model of institutional assessment. • Using artifacts for CSLO assessment preserves our commitment to student learning by recognizing and valuing our institution’s “specific needs and circumstances” (Seybert, 2004, p. 9).

15. The definition… An Artifact*is any assignment-driven student-produced work such as a project, demonstration, speech, performance, examination, or portfolio, that can be assessed to determine student achievement of one (or more) of the CSLOs. It is a flexible approach to institutional-level assessment. *While the word artifact conveys different meanings in a variety of academic disciplines, it has a specific meaning in the realm of assessment, not to be confused with other denotations or connotations.

16. Advantages of the Artifact Model… • The process is “invisible” to students. • The artifacts are often the same assignments used for course and/or program assessment. • Faculty can “teach to the artifact.” • We are measuring what we value: the CSLOs. • Many other institutions are using this minimally intrusive model.

17. And the disadvantages… • The Artifact Model requires a commitment on the part of faculty, deans, assessment committee members, and institutional researchers to collect and assess artifacts, analyze data, report results, and make changes. • It can be messy because it involves multidisciplinary responsibility.

18. Yearly Cycle:A work in progress • We identify courses from which to select artifacts, perhaps 100 total. • Students, nearing program completion, give permission for us to use their artifacts. • The Assessment Committee (or faculty assessment teams) assesses artifacts using CLSO rubric(s). • Results are entirely independent of an instructor’s grading process.

19. No Black Hole Here • Results will be reported back to faculty, Deans, & VPL. • Results will not be used to evaluate individual students or faculty members. • Results will influence curriculum, course, and program design. • Results will demonstrate that we are committed to improving student learning.

20. Current Atmospheric Conditions • The Assessment Committee (AC) has twice piloted an Artifact Assessment: • ENGL 211 Portfolio and “THINK” rubric • All 5 CSLO rubrics and several different artifacts, with focused discussion on MATH 130. • The AC continues to educate the college community and encourage assessment at all levels.

21. The Extended Forecast • Baseline Assessment Inventory • L3 Initiative*: “Implement comprehensive assessment processes to focus on Common Student Learning Outcomes.”*SJC Operational Plan 2006-2010. • February 14, 2007 CTX Workshop: We Love♥ Assessment!. • Refine the college-wide process for collecting, analyzing, and reporting Artifact Assessment results.

22. On the Horizon: Assessment Academy • Send a team of 5-8 faculty and staff to the HLC Academy for Assessment of Student Learning in June 2006. • In preparation, one to two members of the June cohort will attend an Information and Planning Workshop in May 2006.

23. Assessment Academy, cont’d • The Assessment Academy is a 4-year sequence of events focused on student learning designed to accelerate and advance assessment efforts. • Our goal: to create sustainable and useful assessment practices with the help of assessment experts.

24. Planetary Alignment:The New Mexico State Higher Education Department’s Assessment Task Force • Since March 2006, SJC has been represented on the task force. • Our job is to recommend, to the legislature, student learning outcomes assessment strategies for the General Education core competencies.

25. NM State Assessment Task Force, cont’d • The HED will not dictate how institutions do assessment. • The institutions want credible, authentic, usable data derived from assessment practices that make sense with our programs.

26. NMHEAR, Feb. 22-23, 2007 • Penner & Wilson on Task Force panel “Finding our Focus: Assessing HED General Education Competencies.” • We will present an overview of SJC’s assessment plan & artifact model.

27. Pale Blue Dots • Assessment is crucial to measuring our effectiveness at Helping Students Learn. • We are committed to classroom, course, program, and institutional Assessment that makes sense, and improves both teaching and learning.

28. From Asteroid…. • Review of challenges: • Developing effective and efficient processes. • Involving more people. • Learning from other schools.

29. …to Zenith • Questions? • Comments?

30. Reference Seybert, J. ( 2004). How to initiate an assessment program. In T. W. Banta (Ed.), Community college assessment (pp. 7-9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.