WASC Home > CPR Reports
Back

EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES INITIATIVES SUMMARY

The discussion on this section was held December 1, 2005 and was supplemented by e-mail comments and follow-up work done by the Academic Council.

One of the key items noted in the conversation is that it is expected that many of the recommendations will come from the work of various WASC teams since much of this is related to detailed campus procedures.

Ideas:

  • There needs to be larger set of standard indicators built and maintained over time (the Strategic Planning Committee is working on this).
  • The list of co-curricular indicators needs to be fleshed out.
  • Some departments are in need of additional assistance in developing their assessment plans (the Assessment Committee is working on this)

Note:

  • CPR Group One Data recommends:
    • The data portfolio needs to continue to grow as various WASC teams and divisions of the University identify essential data needed for decision making.
    • PLNU needs to increase the staffing and support for Institutional Research including assisting individual departments with their data needs.  For specific recommendations, see Institutional Research Survey of the Group One report of the Group One report.
    • Procedures for gathering standardized data need to be written down. These should include dates and identify individuals responsible for gathering the data.
    • The Data Portfolio provides a much-needed central location for data; however, a great deal of manual work currently underlies the creation of the tables.  Ultimately, PLNU needs to look at making better use of its central data base in CARS to build and maintain these tables automatically.
    • All raw survey data needs to be stored electronically with appropriate privacy protections.  This includes standardized surveys in which PLNU participates.  When practical, the additional fee to obtain raw data should be paid.
    • As part of our effort to create a “culture of evidence” at PLNU, the use of data needs to be documented in reports.  If data is used, it should be cited; this should be standard practice for all annual reports.  In addition, the institution needs to verify that data collected is useful.  Are we truly using the information gathered as part of decision making or research processes?
  • CPR Group Two: Educational Effectiveness Indicators recommends:
    • The General Education Committee needs to create a mechanism for the ongoing assessment and revision of general education. Part of this work should consist in a re-conceptualization of General Education as being principally about the needs of students and not about the needs of departments; thus General Education should be seen as belonging to all the faculty and not just to individual departments. This mechanism should include ongoing conversation with students about general education.
  • CPR Group Four: Standards 2&4 recommends:
    • It is recommended that PLNU make a continued and stronger effort to show faculty how to use and interpret the current national instruments so that student evaluations can be used for formative purposes.
    • It is recommended that the Center for Teaching and Learning focus efforts on formative evaluation in order to better assess teaching and learning at PLNU.
  • CPR Group Five: Planning recommends:
    • Expand the existing planning data set to include a broader range of key performance indicators for the institution.
  • CPR Group Six: Assessment recommends:
    • Improve structures of data collection, especially the following:
    • Improve tracking system for alumni
    • Improve tracking system for students who change majors
    • Improve support for assessment leaders through additional personnel, guidance and mentoring
      • Formalize system to distribute assessment funds for testing, evaluator stipends, workshop attendance and development
      • Assess adequacy of the current budget to support assessment activities
      • Create a new position devoted to supporting assessment activities Suggestion: recruit a staff member with interpersonal and assessment skills, and who has a significant portion of his/her position description allocated for University assessment. This new staff position could be housed in the Office of Institutional Research.
      • Improve communication with assessment leaders, provide regular updates, post a calendar of events, deadlines and assessment resources
      • Work on recognizing the Assessment Committee as a valuable resource to facilitate outcome-based assessment efforts
    • Improve system to document assessment activities
      • Improve clarity of reporting guidelines
      • Standardize documentation system
      • Provide support for units with external accreditation to seamlessly comply with standardized documentation and formatting guidelines
    • Improve and deepen culture of assessment and assessment activities
      • Provide broad enough scope for both curricular and co-curricular units to understand and relate to the value of assessment
      • Discuss, evaluate and support leader motivation for conducting assessment activities
      • Help assessment leaders and faculty/staff discover how to use the results of assessment activities for program improvement
      • Reach full compliance (100%) of assessment activities (plan, measurement, data analysis and use of results) for all academic degrees and major programs
      • Link assessment objectives more explicitly to the University mission, “To teach, to shape, to send”
      • Continue progress toward assessment of co-curricular programs, with particular attention to areas that can provide insight into student learning and formation
      • Continue progress toward assessment of the general education program
      • Improve measurement of educational effectiveness indicators
      • Increase visible supportive role of administrative leadership toward the importance of assessment
      • Work on strategies to improve attitudes toward assessment
        Suggestion: bring in peers from other CCCU institutions that are doing exemplary and effective assessment work, to provide motivation and illustrate its value. Set up meetings with the Assessment Committee and match these external peers to specific PLNU disciplines/departments or co-curricular areas.

Framing questions:

  1. Are there additional academic indicators we should be collecting?
  2. Are there additional KPI’s (Key Performance Indicators) that we should be developing – particularly involving student overseas and leadership experiences?
  3. Do our EEI’s (Educational Effectiveness Indicators) point to any specific area or program that needs immediate attention?
  4. Are there areas in the assessment program that require immediate attention?
  5. What three initiatives could the institution undertake to support and promote a culture of evidence?