No Hoops Assessment

1. No Hoops Assessment Moreno Valley College Faculty FLEX Day August 25, 2011

2. What do we mean by “assessment”? Assessment refers to the identification of expected outcomes as determined by the values of the faculty; the selection of methods for measuring thoughts, behaviors, and feelings associated with outcome statements; the design or plan for administering the measure; and the recommendations formulated by faculty after they have reviewed the information collected (Palomba & Banta, 1999)

3. Levels of Assessment • Course • Program • General Education

4. Direct and Indirect Assessment

5. Some Direct Assessment Methods • Culminating Projects • In-class Presentations • Writing Assignments • Exams • Portfolios • Videos • Interviews

6. ACCJC Expects us to be at the “developmental” level now

7. College has established an institutional framework for definition of student learning   outcomes (where to start), how to extend, and timeline. • College has established authentic assessment strategies for assessing student learning   outcomes as appropriate to intended course, program, and degree learning outcomes. • Existing organizational structures (e.g. Senate, Curriculum Committee) are supporting   strategies for student learning outcomes definition and assessment.

8. Leadership groups (e.g. Academic Senate and administration), have accepted responsibility   for student learning outcome implementation. • Appropriate resources are being allocated to support student learning outcomes and   assessment. • Faculty and staff are fully engaged in student learning outcomes development

9. Assessment as a Six-step Process Identify an SLO to assess Decide how you will do the assessment Analyze your findings from the assessment Design and implement an intervention Discuss your findings Repeat

10. To Template or Not to Template • Goal: Make the process as simple as possible, especially for adjunct faculty • Could revise the template • Could use a non-template project

11. Reported To ACCJC in June • Percent of all college courses with defined SLOs:  100% • Percent of all college courses with on-going assessment of learning outcomes:  27% • Percent of all college programs with defined SLOs:  81% • Percent of all programs with on-going assessment of learning outcomes:  16%

12. Reported To ACCJC in June • Percent of student learning and support activities with defined SLOs:  75% • Percent of student learning and support activities with on-going assessment of learning outcomes:  30% • Has the institution defined institutional SLOs:  yes • Percent of institutional outcomes with on-going assessment of learning outcomes:  100%

13. Currently… • Percentage of courses assessed • BITS 22% • COMM 54% • HHPS 17% (if self-studies are counted, 55%) • HSS 50% • MSK 88% • PSET– in progress

14. ACCJC Expects SLO assessment to be at the “proficient” level by 2012

15. • Student learning outcomes and authentic assessment are in place for courses, programs and degrees. • There is widespread institutional dialogue about the results of assessment and identificationof gaps. • Decision-making includes dialogue on the results of assessment and is purposefully   directed toward aligning institution-wide practices to support and improve student learning.

16. • Appropriate resources continue to be allocated and fine-tuned. • Comprehensive assessment reports exist and are completed and updated on a regular basis. • Course student learning outcomes are aligned with degree student learning outcomes. • Students demonstrate awareness of goals and purposes of courses and programs in  which they are enrolled.

17. How do we plan to get to proficiency?

18. Assessment Activities for fall • Target courses where no assessment has been conducted – especially in areas with many courses and many part-time faculty • Have workshops through CFD that highlight exemplary models and/or discuss findings from assessment projects • Continue to work with the CTE programs who have external self-studies to use those materials as evidence

19. At the district level • Work to refine Gen Ed SLOs • Use what we are finding to possibly modify Gen Ed requirements for AA degrees • Work to define how program level outcomes can be assessed

20. Support for Assessment • MV Assessment Committee (MVAC) • Larisa Broyles • Dan Clark • Cheryl Honore • Diane Marsh • Delores Middleton

21. MV SLO Steering Committee • Lisa Conyers, VP Academic Affairs • Carlos Tovares, Interim Dean of Instruction • Travis Gibbs, President, Academic Senate • Sheila Pisa, Assessment Coordinator

22. District Assessment Committee • Arend Flick • Greg Aycock • Susan Mills • Jim Elton • Sheila Pisa • Sylvia Thomas

23. MV Assessment Website • Templates • Rubrics • Projects • http://www.mvcsp.com/loa • Link to Assessment through college’s website mvc.edu

24. Why Should We Assess and Document Assessment Efforts?

25. Assessment Stories • Travis Gibbs – Documenting what you’re already doing

26. Assessment Stories • Dan Clark – Discipline discussion that arises because of assessment projects

27. Assessment Stories • Donna Lesser – Alternate means of course and SLO assessment using discipline meetings and write-ups

28. Assessment Stories • Sheila Pisa – How assessment can lead to development of new courses to meet a need.

29. Sheila Pisa Moreno Valley Humanities 316 951-571-6146 Sheila.pisa@rcc.edu