WASC Home > CPR Reports
Back

Appendix 8
Assessment Committee Report to Faculty

November 30, 2005

Committee Established: 

  Ad hoc: 1990
  Ad hoc reestablished: 2000
  Permanent: 4-10-02

Membership (2005-2006):

  WASC Capacity and Preparatory Review:  Group Six
  WASC Educational Effectiveness Review: Group One
  Elected: Keith Pedersen (Arts: Art, Literature/Journalism/Modern Languages, Music, Theology/Christian Ministry)
    Jesus Jimenez (Sciences: Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematical/Information Sciences)       
    Ron Kirkemo (Social Sciences: Communication/Theatre, History/Political Science, Psychology, Sociology/Social Work)
    Anita Smith (Professional Studies: Business, Family/Consumer Sciences, Kinesiology/Athletic Training, Nursing)       
    Jim Johnson (Education)
               
  Ex officio: Cheryl Gaughan (Institutional Research)      
  (appointed) Becky Modesto (Spiritual Development)
    Anne-Elizabeth Powell (Library Services)
    Caye Smith (Student Development)
    Barbara Rutledge (Information Technology)
    Hadley Wood (Dean of General Education and WASC Liaison)
    Becky Havens, Chair (Vice Provost for Educational Effectiveness)

Definition:

Assessment at Point Loma Nazarene University is the gathering, synthesis and utilization of information in order to facilitate on-going improvement in the institution’s effectiveness to achieve its mission and to achieve learning objectives in major academic programs and general education.

Major Responsibilities (Faculty Handbook):

  1. Oversee the assessment program for the university, in order to support institutional effectiveness.
  2. Work with chairs of academic major programs to review program learning objectives, means of assessment, criteria for assessment, results of assessment, and use of results.
  3. Work with educational support units to review program objectives, means of assessment, criteria for assessment, results of assessment, and use of results.
  4. Work with the general education committee to oversee assessment of the general education program.
  5. Work with Institutional Research to link data collection with the assessment of major programs and general education.
  6. Provide summary documentation and reports, as needed, detailing the assessment program of the university, in support of institutional accreditation.
  7. Ensure that the institutional assessment program is linked to the university’s strategic plan and the academic planning process.

Preparation for WASC
Reference: www.pointtloma.edu/accreditation

Capacity and Preparatory Review Report
Charge 1: Review progress on assessment since the last WASC visit
Charge 2: Assess the current status of assessment at PLNU
Charge 3: Make recommendations for improvements to the assessment system

Educational Effectiveness Report
Charge: Document evidence of a rich culture of assessment, the use of evidence-based decision making, and a structure of continuous improvement in student learning in academic programs, general education, co-curricular programs and in broad educational outcomes at an institutional level

Capacity and Preparatory Review Report

Charge 1: Progress on Assessment since the Last WASC Visit

  • Multiple efforts were taken by university leaders to build formal structures for assessment activities, processes, oversight and support
  • A formal model (Nichols) was established, allowing flexibility and adaptation across units
  • An attempt was made to take a positive approach of support and encouragement, and to show the value of assessment
  • A slow but significant culture change has occurred, wherein members of academic and co-curricular units have become involved in a continual learning process that is a common project across the university

Charge 2: Current Status of Assessment at PLNU

  • A survey of those leading assessment efforts in their units was conducted, revealing both strengths and weaknesses in the current system
    • Strengths: understanding of the system, belief that assessment is a team effort, establishment of clear learning objectives, assessment plan links student learning to program mission, data is being collected, current system provides enough guidance
    • Weaknesses: inadequate support, concern as to whether assessment efforts yield productive results with respect to curricular change or program improvement
  • The committee dialogued with each academic unit leader during spring 2005, yielding information on the current status
    • Approximately 90-95% of academic units are on target with assessment plans, measurement tools and are gathering data
    • Approximately 75% of academic units have been collecting and using assessment data for between three to fourteen years
  • While a culture of assessment activities has grown richer and deeper at the university, an effective means of documenting and reporting these activities is still being developed on a consistent wide-scale and standardized basis
  • Ongoing and improved work to guide and mentor academic and co-curricular leaders in the development, processing and documentation of assessment activities is necessary

Charge 3: Recommendations

  1. Improve structures of data collection to support assessment efforts
    • Institute tracking systems for alumni and students who change majors
  2. Improve mentoring, guidance and support for assessment leaders
    • Formalize systems of documentation
    • Increase personnel resources to support assessment work
    • Provide resources for development
  3. Improve system to document assessment activities
    • Standardize documentation system
    • Provide support for units with external accreditation to attain seamless compliance with internal documentation guidelines
  4. Improve and deepen culture of assessment
    • Increase understanding
    • Increase value, both perceived and real
    • Progress toward full compliance in academic units and increased compliance in co-curricular areas
    • Become a learning organization

Committee Work (2005-2006)

  1. Complete WASC Capacity and Preparatory Review Report
    • Update Educational Effectiveness Inventory
  2. Prepare for WASC Educational Effectiveness Review
    • Devise standard web documentation system
  3. Develop assessment web page
  4. Receive annual reports: academic and co-curricular
  5. Support general education assessment and measurement of Educational Effectiveness Indicators (EEIs)
  6. Improve support and development for leaders of assessment efforts in academic and co-curricular units
    • Develop Assessment Handbook
    • Devise peer consultation systems
    • Attend development workshops
  7. Link assessment program to academic planning and strategic planning