Ge program assessment ay 05 06
1 / 16

GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06. Goal – Provide valid, reliable information on student performance in foundational domains of GE that can: guide GE review suggest curricular changes to enhance student learning

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06' - shadow

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Ge program assessment ay 05 06
GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06

  • Goal – Provide valid, reliable information on student performance in foundational domains of GE that can:

    • guide GE review

    • suggest curricular changes to enhance student learning

  • AY 05-06: Assessment of 3 broad domains – writing, quantitative reasoning, oral communication

Ge program assessment ay 05 061
GE Program Assessment, AY 05-06

  • Need to move beyond usual course-level assessment

    • GE Program Assessment is called for in AAO MOU that administers GE on campus

  • How are our students doing in the broad skill/knowledge domains covered in GE?

    • Can’t be answered by course-level assessment

Solving the ge assessment puzzle
Solving the GE Assessment puzzle …

  • Manageable, Meaningful, Sustainable

    • Manageable: don’t want to overburden already hard working faculty

    • Meaningful: provide valid, reliable information of relevance to questions of academic quality

    • Sustainable: KISS rule … assessment must be an ongoing process


  • Mission, Goals, Student Learning Outcomes model … adapting assessment methods used for baccalaureate programs to GE

    • Mission, goals provided by EM 99-05

    • Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for GE derived, by faculty, from GE goals

    • Student performance on SLOs observed/ measured in GE courses

  • Assessment results analyzed, guide curricular change and reform

Methodology cont d
Methodology (cont’d)

  • Direct Assessment: Measure/observe actual student performance on the skills/knowledge we value (SLOs)

  • Embedded Assessment: Measure/ observe student performance on existing tasks

  • Close the Loop: Results guide changes aimed at improving student learning


  • GE on this campus governed by a series of “rules”

    • Title 5, EO 595, EM 99-05, AAO-MOU




  • GEAC advises Provost on GE, including assessment

  • AURA responsible for assisting faculty with baccalaureate program and GE assessment

  • Need to build collaborative structure


Coordinating Committee: AURA Chair, GEAC Chair, Dean Undergraduate Studies


General Education Advisory Committee


All University Responsibility

for Assessment Committee

Task Forces: 1 (Oral Communication), 2 (Writing), 3 (Quantitative reasoning). Each Task Force has an AURA member, GEAC member, and an additional faculty member.


  • Goal: GE Program Assessment must be Manageable, Meaningful, Sustainable

  • Participatory … faculty input

    • How to build-in faculty input?

  • Produce valid, reliable, timely results

  • Consequential … results should guide GE reform

Process cont d
Process (cont’d)

  • Task Forces are working groups that lead effort

  • Task Forces consult with additional faculty throughout process

  • Task Forces coordinate efforts, do much of the actual work involved

  • Task Forces report results to Provost and campus community



1. Fernlund (AURA), 2. Loker (Dean UED) 3. Alger (GEAC)

  • Task Force 2: Writing

  • Chris Fosen, GEAC, ENGL, Chair

  • Sarah Blackstone, AURA, HFA

  • Judith Rodby, ENGL

  • Additional faculty with expertise, interest

  • Task Force 3: Quantitative Reasoning Margaret Owens, AURA, NS, Chair Russ Mills, GEAC, CIVL Jack Ladwig, MATH Additional faculty with expertise, interest

Process cont d1
Process (cont’d)

  • Using EM 99-05, Task Forces define SLOs, in consultation with faculty

  • Using SLOs, Task Forces work with faculty to analyze curriculum, determine “sites for assessment”

  • Task Forces work with faculty to select assignments for “embedded assessment”

Process cont d2
Process (cont’d)

  • Task Forces, in collaboration with faculty, devise rubrics for assessing student work

  • Student work collected (Spring 06) using STEPS process where possible


  • Task Forces and faculty work to achieve “inter-rater reliability” in assessing student work

Process cont d3
Process (cont’d)

  • Task Forces and faculty assess student work using rubrics and standards agreed upon for this purpose

  • Assessment results analyzed with an eye to spotting areas for improvement in student performance, curriculum

  • Results and recommendations written up and conveyed to Provost, campus

1. Task Forces Formed


2. Task Forces consult with faculty on GE SLOs 10/05

3. Task Forces & faculty analyze curriculum for “assessment sites” 10-11/05

4. Task Forces & faculty select assignments, develop rubrics, 11/05

6. Assessment of student work by Task Forces & faculty April-May 06

5. Student work collected from appropriate courses Sp 06

7. Assessment results analyzed and written up Summer 06

8. Results reported to Provost, campus August 06


  • Assessment results form basis for change/reform of GE

  • Further GE Program Assessment carried out in AY 06-07 … critical thinking and breadth areas

  • Assess assessment: How’d we do?

  • GE reforms designed and implemented in AY 07-08?


  • “Jazz” assessment: new process, will require creativity, improvisation

  • Participatory assessment … faculty input

  • “Learning” organization … we need to learn about GE

  • Culture of evidence … change in GE should be based on evidence

  • Focus on student learning … #1 priority

  • Transparency and accountability … no hidden agendas