1 / 10

Assessment Review Committee Report for 2012-2013 Student Affairs

Assessment Review Committee Report for 2012-2013 Student Affairs. Kathleen Hill Director for Assessment, Research & Retention Prepared for Presentation on March 4 , 2014. 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment, and Research. Mentoring/Review Process.

caesar-wilder
Download Presentation

Assessment Review Committee Report for 2012-2013 Student Affairs

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessment Review CommitteeReport for 2012-2013Student Affairs Kathleen Hill Director for Assessment, Research & Retention Prepared for Presentation on March 4, 2014 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment, and Research

  2. Mentoring/Review Process • Decision made by SA Executive Council that ARC should be primarily composed of individuals NOT currently serving on the Student Affairs Assessment Team but would be effective contributors to the review process. • Assessment Review Committee finalized in August 2013: • Gretchen Brockmann – Campus Living • Kathy Hill – SAARR • Susan Morrissey – IPAR (OIA Rep) • Bernie Schulz – SA Administration • Meagan Smith – Student Involvement & Leadership • Laura Sweet – Dean of Students Broad representation across Division of Student Affairs, assessment knowledge and experience, critical eye – constructive comments 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  3. Mentoring/Review Process • Committee training held on September 10 • Committee group review session held on September 20 • Looked at 2011-2012 review exemplar attending to feedback language • Completed two 2012-2013 reviews as a group • Discussed feedback strategies and inter-rater reliability considerations • 32 Unit Reports: Each reviewer was assigned 5-6 unit reports; reviewed on an individual basis; reviewers did not review any units with direct affiliation • Initial messaging regarding process and timeline shared with SAEC, SALT, and SAAT in September; regular updates provided at respective leadership meetings • Face to Face Feedback: Kathy Hill met with “clusters” of units to review feedback, discuss steps for addressing developing ratings, and integrate with 2013-2014 assessment plan/processes in progress 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  4. 2012-13 Component Data 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  5. Data Visualization 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  6. Aggregate Comparison: 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 Division of Student Affairs Aggregated 2012-2013 Assessment Report Review Summary: D = Developing A = Acceptable P = Proficient D = (48%) A = (36%) P = (16%) (A+ P = 52%) Division of Student Affairs Aggregated 2011-2012 Assessment Report Review Summary: D = Developing A = Acceptable E = Exemplary D = (51%) A = (42%) E = ( 7%) (A+ E = 49%) 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  7. 2012-13 Best Practices – “Closing the Loop” Marketing: “Effectiveness” operational outcome assessment related to project ticketing system – have been able to resolve any issues around timeliness, process and product dissatisfaction. SA ticketing system has been adopted by Institutional marketing. Volunteer and Service-Learning Center: Outcomes refined, multiple measures with appropriate criteria for success, documented results, actions generated out of results…evidence that assessment is fully embedded in practice of VSLC. Development and Parent Services: New leadership to new assessment plan – integration of strategic planning and annual assessment cycle. CRW Wellness: Wellness Passport outcome – exemplar of “authentic” embedded assessment process with consistent “closing the loop” process. Ongoing and immediate adjustments to program planning and implementation. 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  8. Substantive ChangesDivisionalPerspective Focus on internalizing responsibility for assessment cycle among SA leadership and staff at large: Division alignment with institutional practices, regular briefings re progress and needed improvements, accountability support Annual Division Assessment Retreat: Scheduled in May in support of August reporting Roll Out of New Reporting Framework: Results and actions planned, then implementation report; positive reception! Cycle Emphasis: “learning” outcomes, multiple measures, results to actions reporting “logic” and documentation. Strategic Plan to Outcomes Assessment Integration: Stronger alignment with current planning process in progress 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  9. Rubric and Review Process Feedback Worked well: IPAR Training followed by Committee “group review” session - examples and completing several reviews together  “on the same page” Consultation with ARC chair throughout process, addressing questions, etc. Not having committee members review unit reports they have affiliation – preventing bias, and perception of bias Difficulties: Two members new to university - understanding ECU systems and terminology Technology - timed out of system, having to re-enter reviews Incomplete unit reports delayed review process 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

  10. Rubric and Review Process Feedback Suggestions for Improvement Integration emphasis – unit assessment cycle, review feedback, improvement applied to report reviewed and current year’s assessment cycle Continue to engage SA leadership and staff in “improvement” feedback and implementation – ownership and accountability Focus on inter-rater reliability Formalize a “sample” unit report for practicing unit review (independent of group review) Committee members should review same unit reports for 2013-2014 review cycle – assessing unit progress improvement and assuring consistency in feedback “Refresher” training prior to launching 2013-2014 review process 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

More Related