Glendale
Community College
NCA
Self-Study Report, January 2002
Assessment and Program Review
Assessment of Student Learning
Academic
assessment is defined in terms of what students should “think, know, and do”
upon completion of courses and programs.
Assessment of student success occurs at three levels: College-wide
academic achievement, program-level assessment, and course-level
assessment. GCC faculty are
responsible for developing assessment activities. The Dean of Instruction is responsible for the process and
funding has been allocated to support assessment.
College-Wide Academic Achievement
for General Education
The College-wide
assessment initiative of general-education outcomes stems from a belief that
assessment of student academic achievement plays a fundamental role in the
improvement of student learning.
GCC identified 6 outcomes for assessment. These outcomes were further subdivided into core and
secondary outcomes. To date, the
College has measured core outcomes.
GCC College-Wide General Education
Student Learning Outcomes |
|
|
Core
Outcomes |
§
Writing
– communicates thoughts, ideas, information, and messages §
Critical
Reading – interprets and synthesizes a variety of written information §
Critical
Reasoning – thinks creatively and critically; acquires and applies new
knowledge and skills. Applies mathematical techniques to problem solving,
analyses, and exposition |
|
Secondary
Outcomes |
§
Speaking
– organizes and communicates ideas and information, including listening §
Information
and Technology Literacy – uses a variety of resources to locate, evaluate,
and use information to solve a problem or make decisions §
Liberal
studies – examines human knowledge, thought, and experience in the
humanities, natural sciences, and social and behavioral sciences |
Source: CWAAC Spring 2001 and GCC 2001-02
Catalog
Glendale’s College-Wide
Academic Achievement Committee (CWAAC) chose The Academic Profile, a standardized test of general academic
knowledge and skills produced and scored by the Educational Testing Service
(ETS) as its mechanism for College-wide assessment. Each March since 1999, a random sample of students
graduating with an Associate Degree is invited to take the test. The annual cohort sample size is
sufficient to reflect cohort performance within a margin of error of +/-
8%. The committee produces an
annual assessment report (“College-Wide Assessment Initiative: A Progress
Report”). The District-wide
Student Academic Achievement Committee facilitates a Governing Board Strategic
Conversation during which all10MCCCD colleges report progress in measuring
student academic achievement.
Academic Program-Level Assessment
Assessment plans
examine what students should think, know, or do when they complete a program
degree or certificate. Each
spring, faculty update their “5-Column Model” assessment plans for transfer,
occupational degrees and certificates, and developmental education
programs. Columns in the model
address (1) program goals and objectives; (2) program outcomes; (3) assessment
methods and criteria for success; (4) summary of data collected; and (5) use of
results. Results are to be used to
address curriculum modifications, i.e., course competencies to improve
program-learning outcomes for students.
Assessment plans are kept in binders in departments. Student support services and
College-wide services also have assessment plans linked to the College mission
and purposes.
Course-Level Assessment
Faculty liaisons
in each department work with their peers to document how course competencies
are assessed. Course-level
assessment varies from department to department and even within
departments. A full range of
assessment tools is employed, ranging from pre- and post-tests to
portfolios. Course-level
assessment is tied to course competencies regardless of department or
discipline. Liaisons meet
periodically to share ideas about assessment techniques and interpretation of
data. Course-level
assessment plans are kept in binders in departments.
Program Review
Program review is
a process very distinct from assessment.
Where assessment focuses on what students should “think, know, and do”
and how well that is accomplished, program review focuses on how relevant a
program is and how valid the contents of the program are to students and the
community today. Program review is
conducted in both academic and service areas.
Academic Program Review
The College piloted a
program review process with Computer Aided Drafting in 1998. After evaluating the process, a
decision was made to create a template based on the District risk management
model. The College is working with
the District to provide feedback on the effectiveness of the program-review
template. Each program review
looks at enrollment trends, graduation statistics, advisory committee
recommendations, and student feedback to determine whether a program should be
expanded, modified, or placed on moratorium or eliminated. The review process represents a
synthesis of information from many sources to ensure that programs are current
and competitive. Approximately
sixteen programs are scheduled for program review during 2001-02. The program review template and
schedule are published on the IE web at
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu:2049/ie/PlanningBudgetingAssessing/AcademicPrograms/AcademicPrograms.html (restricted access – username gccguest)
Student Services Program Review
Over the past 3 years,
a select number of student service units have participated in program-review
processes as defined by the Council for Advancement of Standards in Higher
Education (CAS). After all student
service units have participated in the review process, the Dean of Educational
Services will evaluate the worth of continuing the use of the Course
Applicability System (CAS). CAS
assessment results are available in departments and a few have been published
on the IE web page at
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu:2049/ie/PlanningBudgetingAssessing/StudentServices/StudentServices.html (restricted access – username gccguest)
Achievements since 1992
· Effective implementation of a College-wide
assessment process for student academic achievement
· In Spring 2001, after several years of
development, publication of results of the current general-education assessment
test to the internal and external communities; GCC students exceeded all
criteria for success set by CWAAC.
On average, GCC students scored higher in all core outcome areas. This performance was recognized in the Arizona
Republic and during the
Fall convocation ceremony by Chancellor Gaskin who presented the College with a
$5,000 check to further its assessment program
· Implemented an Assessment Day each January
when faculty are briefed on College-wide assessment activities and are provided
opportunities to share program- and course-level assessment techniques
· Identified course-level assessment liaisons
for all departments who maintain assessment matrices for their respective
departments and assist faculty in developing course-level assessment programs
· Participation by all Student Service units
in the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education Self-Study
(CAS)
· Implementation of a program-review process
in Fall 2001 to determine if all occupational programs meet the needs of
students, employers, and business and industry
Team Analysis
Teams
8 and 12 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing the areas
of improvement and their relationship to the measures of success, which
included 60% of students attain or exceed the highest level of performance on The
Academic Profile,
successful transfer of students to universities, and successful employment of
students in their fields of study.
GCC has both the human and financial resources, as well as the
processes, to assess student learning.
The current lack of data on transfer students from the state
universities, seen as a weakness, has made the assessment of successful student
transfers to universities difficult for the last few years.
Areas for Improvement
· Administering The Academic Profile to a larger cohort for College-wide
assessment
· Developing assessment mechanisms and
timelines for all secondary outcomes at the College-wide level
· Developing assessment plans for all
programs and courses
· Linking course- and program-level
assessment to College-wide outcomes and assessment
· Providing ongoing training in writing and
implementing assessment plans
Recommendations
· Continue research on assessment programs at
similar institutions
· Encourage participation in regional and
national assessment conferences
· Develop a timeline to assess secondary
student learning outcomes
· Solicit/encourage university assessment
coordinator participation on CWAAC
· Host assessment conferences with ASU, ASU
West, NAU, and UofA
· Develop a longitudinal study that tracks
selected GCC students’ performance over a longer period of time
· Refine the college-wide assessment of
student academic achievement
· Develop additional incentives for students
to do well on The Academic Profile,
in addition to obtaining a representative sample each year
· Conduct training, workshops, and
faculty-development activities to improve course-level learning outcomes and
assessment for students
· Determine if CAS will continue to be used
to evaluate student service units
· Collect data from assessments to provide
high quality, quantitative data necessary to support planning and improve
instruction
· Continue use of 5-column assessment model
· Inventory all assessment plans
· Find and showcase plans that are effective
· Encourage MCCCD to review AGEC using on our
5-column model
· Continue an Annual Assessment Day and
orient new faculty
· Evaluate the effectiveness of the district
program-review template
Content Area Validation
GCC has come a
long way since assessment planning began in 1994. At the College-wide level, it has identified a cohort,
selected a nationally recognized instrument, and developed a process to
administer tests annually.
Progress also continues at the program and course levels as departments
and faculty transition from traditional grading to assessment in their
particular disciplines. CWAAC will
focus on investigating ways to assess Information and Technology Literacy and
to develop longitudinal studies to assess how assessment cohorts perform after
they leave GCC and enter a four-year university and/or the work place.
In addition, the
state-wide student tracking data warehouse, ASSIST, will enable information
about the number and performance of GCC transfer students to the state
universities to be monitored on a regular basis. The College should showcase program-review plans that work
effectively. Then, during regularly
scheduled training sessions, other areas can build on work, processes, and
procedures that will eventually become institutionalized. Through the departments, the College
should revisit and evaluate advisory committees’ input routinely for possible
implementation into the program.
Before a template is adopted in a final form, the College needs to
evaluate the Program Review Pilot Project.
|
|
Last revised 1/8/02. Direct feedback to l.hawbaker@gcmail.maricopa.edu. See Legal Disclaimer.