Review of Recommendations and Prioritization of the Core Competencies

On August 27, 2007 , the May 2007 report of the AAMP Task Force on Assessment was reviewed. What follows are the notes from the discussion that ensued.

The decision by Dr. Curtis to hire an Assessment Coordinator as recommended in the Task Force report was applauded. Discussion ensued regarding the role of the task force in the hiring process of this person; a strong role was enthusiastically endorsed (committee presence and drafting of the interview questions and writing the job description). This person was visualized as a “go to” person to assist the faculty is a great addition but a collaborative person vs. a dictator is needed. Likewise, there was a strong feeling that the hire should be an internal individual (with release or extended time) to promote the buy-in of faculty....along with IR....and supplemented by a faculty committee.

Prioritization of the core competencies identified in the report was not recommended. Literacy (reading and writing) and numeracy are obviously critical but all the competencies were seen as valid and vital. Rather, it was suggested that after the assessment audit is completed, a matrix of all the competencies vs. courses (and competencies vs. programs) be developed following which all units would indicate where (and how?) the competencies were currently being addressed. Gaps in the matrix would indicate where changes are needed.

We need to acknowledge that the student of today is different from the student of 40 years ago. Students see us more as a supermarket where they get to pick and choose at their whim rather than as an institution of learning. If the reality is that 72% of our entering students need remediation, can we not design courses just for them that they must take along with their 3 developmental courses (vs. the “ludicrous” waiver list).... for instance a 3 credit orientation?

Orienting the culture of the College to assessment is needed but the College’s culture is so nebulous that it is difficult to know and steer. The College is redefining itself; going through a mid-life crisis. Therefore, the administration must establish a long term vision as regards assessment (leadership and commitment)....perhaps Achieving the Dream or the like...and link decisions, energy and dollars to this goal for all constituencies. As regards College-wide assessment we need to stress that assessment asks “What are our students learning?” and “How do we know?” We also need to stress that assessment is

1. SoTL...experimentation and evaluation...continuous inquiry;
2. Is a means to ensure uniformity across multiple course sections by being an objective measurement;
3. Moves us toward/demonstrates that we a Learning College;
4. Has best practices which are available to us...find them, use them! (such as a single, assigned advisor/counselor) ;
5. Is establishing a very simple feedback loop.....define a learning outcome, experiment with the means to accomplish it, assess the outcome and adapt the teaching based on the assessment;
6. Is not limited to course grades at the end of the semester. It can be done at the end of a lesson.....and the next class altered based on that assessment;
7. Is acknowledging that enhancing/changing what the instructor does in the classroom does not guarantee learning but that the way a course is structured most definitely can assist or hurt learning...ex. types of test, group projects, etc;
8. Is a shared responsibility....instructor and student and across the institution. The student is challenged to play a role/to be a learner....active engagement vs. a passive receiver;
9. Is not faculty evaluation. Faculty should not feel threatened by experimenting in the classroom; jobs are secure. Change is good...but for some faculty change/assessment outcomes could be met with fear...an ego issue?