1. Mary Allen Qatar University September 2011

2. Workshop participants will be able to:  draft/revise learning outcomes  develop/analyze curriculum maps  develop/refine sustainable, multi-year assessment plans  develop/refine rubrics and calibrate reviewers  analyze assessment results  use a variety of strategies to close the loop  evaluate the impact of improvement actions

3.  an on-going process designed to monitor and improve student learning

4. Faculty:  Develop SLOs  Verify curriculum alignment  Develop an assessment plan  Collect evidence  Assess evidence and reach a conclusion  Close the loop

5.  Standard 3.3.1

6.  Program goals  Cohesive curriculum  How students learn  Course structure and pedagogy  Faculty instructional role  Assessment  Campus support for learning

8.  Direct vs. indirect assessment  Value-added vs. absolute learning outcomes  Authentic assessment  Formative vs. summative assessment  Triangulation

10.  Clarify what faculty want students to learn  Clarify how each outcome can be assessed

11.  Knowledge  Skills  Attitudes/Values/Predispositions

12.  CLO  PLO  ILO

15.  List of goals and outcomes  List of outcomes  Typically 6-8 outcomes in all

17. 1.Active verbs 2.Simple language 3.Real vs. aspirational 4.Aligned with mission 5.Avoid compound outcomes 6.Outcomes vs. learning processes 7.Focus on high-priority learning

18.  Coherence  Synthesizing experiences  On-going practice of learned skills  Opportunities to develop increasing sophistication and to apply what is learned

19.  I = Introduced  D = Developed & Practiced with Feedback  M = Demonstrated at the Mastery Level Appropriate for Graduation

20.  Curriculum Map 2  Curriculum Map 3

21.  CLOs that align with relevant PLOs  Faculty can provide artifacts for assessment  Faculty teach courses consistent with the map

22.  Focuses faculty on curriculum cohesion  Guides course planning  Allows faculty to identify potential sources of assessment evidence  Allows faculty to identify where they might close the loop

23.  Except for NCATE-accredited programs

24.  Who?  What?  Where?  When?  Why?

25.  Relevant samples  Representative samples  Reasonably-sized samples

26.  Anonymity  Confidentiality  Privacy  Informed consent

27. Find examples of:  Direct assessment  Indirect assessment  Formative assessment  Summative assessment  Authentic assessment  Triangulation

28.  PLO  When to assess  What direct and indirect evidence to collect  Who will collect the evidence  How evidence will be assessed  How decisions will be made

29.  Valid  Reliable  Actionable  Efficient and cost-effective  Engages students  Interesting to faculty  Triangulation

30.  Published tests  Locally-developed tests  Embedded assessment  Portfolios

31.  Surveys  Interviews  Focus groups

32.  Holistic  Analytic

33.  Rubric Packet  AAC&U VALUE Rubrics  Specialized Packets

34.  Efficiency  Defines faculty expectations  Well-trained reviewers use the same criteria  Criterion-referenced judgments  Ratings can be done by multiple people

35.  Assess while grading  Assess in a group

36.  Columns are used for assessment  Faculty can adapt an assessment rubric in different ways  Faculty maintain control over their own grading

38.  Grading may require extra criteria  Grading requires more precision  Calibrate when doing assessment

39.  Speed up grading  Clarify expectations to students  Reduce student grade complaints  Improve the reliability and validity of assessments and grades  Make grading and assessment more efficient and effective  Help faculty create better assignments

41.  Below Expectations  Needs Improvement  Meets Expectations  Exceeds Expectations

43.  Adapt an already-existing rubric  Analytic method

44.  Consider starting at the extremes  Some words I find useful

45.  One reader/document.  Two independent readers/document.  Paired readers.

46.  Collect the assessment evidence and remove identifying information.  Develop and pilot test the rubric.  Select exemplars of weak, medium, and strong student work.  Consider pre-programming a spreadsheet so data can be entered and analyzed during the reading and participants can discuss results immediately.

47.  Correlation  Discrepancy Index

49.  How good is good enough?

50.  Celebrate!  Change pedagogy  Change curriculum  Change student support  Change faculty support  Change equipment/supplies/space

53. 1.Focus on what is important. 2.Don’t try to do too much at once. 3.Take samples. 4.Pilot test procedures. 5.Use rubrics. 6.Close the loop. 7.If you rely on adjunct faculty, include them in assessment. 8.Keep a written record.