SUNY GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE November th 2003, Crowne Plaza Hotel, Albany, New York Creating a Comprehensive General Education Assessment Model: A Call for Executive Support, Collaboration of Key Stakeholders, and Triangulation of Measures by Dr. Shawn Van Etten, Director of Institutional Research & Assessment Dr. Mark Prus, Dean, College of Arts & Sciences State University of New York, College at Cortland

Cortland General Education Assessment: A Solid Foundation *Fall 1999: Formal & Comprehensive Assessment of 8 Cortland General Education Categories & Skill Areas THE CORTLAND ASSESSMENT PROCESS 1.President, Provost, Deans, Faculty Senate, GE Committee, Faculty, and Institutional Research Supported GE Assessment; 2.Faculty Senate Endorsed Policy Guiding GE Assessment ; 1.Faculty Teaching Courses in Each GE Category Requested to Develop Essays Questions;

The Cortland Assessment Process Continued 4.GE Committee & Institutional Research Reviewed Items & Selected 1 Item Per Category (Now 2 Items) – Items Best Representing the Goals & Objectives of the Category; 5.Standardized Administration Procedures Developed for ‘Take-Home’ vs ‘In-Class’ and ‘No-Credit Assignment’ vs ‘Credit Assignment’ (Now Recommended ‘In-Class’ and ‘Credit Assignment’); 6.Faculty Trained and Scored Essays Using Two Rubrics (1 General; 1 Specific); Stipend Awarded; 7.Institutional Research Disseminated Results for Formative & Summative Purposes.

Cortland GE Strengths & Voiced Concerns STRENGTHS A.Executive Administrators – Provided: (1) Experts to Support Efforts and Training; (2) Time to Develop; (3) Funding; and (4) Campus-Wide Encouragement. B.Faculty, Faculty Senate, GE Committee, Institutional Research – Collaborated on: (1) Instrument & Rubric Development; (2) Implementation Procedures; and (3) Dissemination of Results. VOICED CONCERNS A.Sampled Faculty Need Ample Time to Build into Syllabi; B.Assessments Should Be Administered During Class Time; C.Students Should Be Assigned Grades for Essays; and D.Assessments Should Be Multidimensional & Automated When Possible.

ISSUES TO CONSIDER A.Faculty Vested in Cortland GE – Resolution of Cortland & SUNY GE’s; B.Stakeholder Awareness of SUNY GE Knowledge & Skill Area Requirements; C.Instrument & Rubric Modification/Development to Assess SUNY GE Goals; D.Timeliness: A Resolution of Administrator and Faculty Timelines. THE TRANSITION PROCESS A.Key Stakeholder Informational Meetings; B.Quasi-Seamless Cortland and SUNY GE Programs; C.GE Committee, Institutional Research, & Faculty Collaborate to Modify Tools; D.Timelines Developed and Implemented. Cortland GE to SUNY GE: The Transition

Triangulation of Results -The development of a comprehensive, valid, and reliable assessment system necessitates triangulation of information across measures, participants, and researchers; without triangulation we base important and often costly decisions on results that may lack both reliability and validity. -SUNY Cortland is in the process of moving from a unidimensional to multidimensional assessment approach, an approach that tries to best represent the various modalities through which students acquire and represent knowledge (e.g., Foreign Language Assessment)