transitioning from Higher Ed to Campuswide

Report
1
Welcome
• Tk20 Sponsored Session www.Tk20.com
– Anthony Cyplik
[email protected]
• University of St. Thomas
– Lucy L. Payne
– Sarah Smith
– Kristine Baker
[email protected]
[email protected]
Overview of Presentation
•
•
•
•
Institutional Background
Tk20 Selection and Implementation
Integration of Tk20 into Campus Systems
Three Types of Departments
– Full embrace assessment
– Transitional
– “Tell me what to do”
• What We’ve Learned
• Next Steps, Q & A
Institutional Background
University of St. Thomas
• Established in 1885
• Diocesan Affiliation
• Campuses / Sites
–
–
–
–
–
Saint Paul
Minneapolis
Rome, Italy
Owatonna, Minnesota
21 active off campus
sites (graduate
programs)
Academic Structure
Seven Colleges & Schools
• College of Arts & Sciences
• Opus College of Business
• College of Education,
Leadership, and
Counseling
• School of Engineering
• School of Law
• School of Social Work
• School of Divinity
Academic Support Units
•
•
•
•
•
Grants & Research
Registrar
International Education
Institutional Effectiveness
Academic Counseling
Additional Academic Information
• 108 Undergraduate
• 437 Full Time Faculty
Majors
• 466 Part Time Faculty
• 51 Undergraduate
• Regional
Minors
Accreditation (HLC)
• 51 Master’s Programs
site visit - November
• 4 Doctoral Programs
2013
• 4 1st Professional
Programs
• 2 Specialist Programs
Students (Fall 2012)
Undergraduate
• 6,336
• 47% female
• 14% students of color
• 96% full time
• 80% from Minnesota
• 93% live on campus
• Average age = 21
Graduate
• 3,980
• 52% female
• 15% students of color
• 31% full time
• 84% from Minnesota
• Average age = 32
Tk20 Selection and Implementation
Selection of Campus Wide
• Tk20 Webinar –
“Evaluating Online
Assessment Systems:
Successful Strategies for
the Selection Process”
• http://www.tk20.com/eve
nts/noncaptch_evaluatin
g_assessment.html
Regional Accreditation
• Where is the data?
– Rotating department
chairs
– Personal computers
• How do we close the
loop?
– Accountability
• How do we report up
the system?
– Deans
– EVP/CAO
Assessment Culture
• Reinvigorate the
Assessment
Conversation
• Connect the Pieces
– Program assessment
– Program review
– Mission assessment
• Recognize Faculty
Expertise
Tk20 Implementation
• UST Structures (decentralized)
– Evaluation of assessment plan is dean
responsibility
• No Standard …
– Assessment plan format
– Storage / organization
– Reporting
• Support Group or Negative Energy?
• Lack of Technical Skills
Implementation – Year 1
• Known Administrator and Staff
• Arts and Sciences
– Collaboration with dean’s office
– Existing assessment plans
– Problem solving and honesty
– Assessment as add on
• Professional Programs (NCATE, APA)
Implementation Changes –
Year 2
• New Staff Position
• Shift in Approach
– Type of department
• Fully embrace
assessment (complex)
• Transitional
• “Tell me what to do”
(simplistic)
– Share – What do you
need?
Types of Departments
Fully Embrace Assessment
Assessment Plan
Previous Reports
Previous Assessment Reporting included collecting scores on nine rubrics, for both
their undergraduates and graduate students, from a variety of faculty and then the
chair had to generating five year running totals. This is one example of the 18
spreadsheets that needed to be created and calculated.
New Reports
(Less Manual calculations)
In Tk20, assessment reporting consists of faculty filling out the rubrics online, the numbers are
automatically generated for each semester and eventually, once we have five years of data we
will be able to automatically pull five-year running averages.
Back Data
Year-End Assessment Reporting
Outcomes
• Department data review leads to course
improvements
• Assessment is made easier with the software
• Better (easier) reporting
• Faculty recognition for expertise in
assessment
• Transparency – access for all faculty
members in department
• Longitudinal data sets – trend analysis
Tell me what to do
• What’s required?
• Limited assessment
knowledge and interest
• Fear of “doing it” wrong
• No interest in changing
assessment plan, tools
or process
Tell me what to do
• Complete grid to have program built
out
– SLO
– Measure and Target
– Assessment type used
– Target course
– Person responsible
– Frequency
• Collect data
• Complete reports
Reporting - First Steps
Next Steps …
• Look at data sets
• Use data to
encourage dean level
conversation on the
assessment plan
• Meet with individual
faculty who show
interest in data
Transition Programs
• Shows interest in learning / doing more
• Great variety
– Update plan
– Explore what software can offer
– Tweak reports
• Faculty becoming more interested in
assessment and moving from “add on” to
integrated assessment perspective
Transitional
• Senior assessment ties back to courses –
course improvements
Transitional
• Tk20 automatically grades the assessment –
saving instructors time
Transitional
• Tk20 report displays results at course level
Allows departments
to identify strengths
and weaknesses.
Transitional
• Tweaking of reports to get needed data
• More departmental conversations
Beginning Transitional
• Expanding assessment – asking what else
can the system do for us?
– Can we administer a test in Tk20 and have it auto
calculate?
• Yes, the system allows for administering tests, reporting
on testing results and grading.
– Can we assess student presentations in Tk20?
Can we have multiple assessors per student?
• Yes, faculty can assess student presentations using
Observations and multiple people can assess the same
student.
Assessment Report
Early Transitional
• Assessment as “add on”
• Assessment plan and data collected
alignment issue
• Assessment plan not followed
• Grab resources (people) when available
• Asking questions
• More conversations
Outcomes
• More conversations at
the department level
• New interest in
assessment
• Realizing assessment
was “add on”
• Looking at student,
course and program
• Asking for help,
feedback, suggestions
Tk20’s connection to other
assessment systems
Annual Reporting
• Not another spreadsheet!!
• Online shared reporting
– Interdisciplinary programs
– Joint degrees
• Allied requirements and assessment data
• Dashboard
– Transparency
• Sharing reports
Program Review
• Required component
– Student outcomes reports
– Mission assessment reports (in development)
• Transparency
• Support units – more focused on
assessment
What did we learn and advice
What did we learn…
• Slow thoughtful implementation
• Learning by doing
• Transition reporting
– Hold all accountable at the same level
• I want more! I want to do it all!
• Program review connections
• Course assessment, student assessment
Great Side effects
• Relationship building
– Partnership with dean’s office
– Academic Affairs and Assessment Faculty
– University Assessment Committee
• Renewal of assessment culture on
campus
– Summer Faculty Development Workshop
• Critical review of assessment plans by
departments
Advice
• Communication is key
– Internal and external
• Role and responsibilities clearly defined
– Implementation
– Evaluation
• Flexibility
– Blessed are the flexible, for they shall not be
bent out of shape
~ Michael McGriffy MD
Next Steps
Now what?
• Complete implementation
– Departments
– Professional Programs
– Administrative Units
•
•
•
•
•
Mission assessment
Assessment reporting for regional accreditation
Continuous improvement
General education
Tie to strategic planning
Strategic Planning
Roll objectives up to Strategic Level
Q&A
Thank you!
Special thanks to our product specialists
Abby – Campus Wide
Steven – Higher Ed
Presented by
• Lucy Payne
– [email protected]
• Tk20
– www.Tk20.com

similar documents