As I begin this course I am interested learning about my cohort’s experiences regarding assessment. In particular, I have an interest in the observations of those who have experienced assessment from the faculty perspective. Much is bantered about in the local institution regarding the assessment process come accreditation time. The inherent problem is the “bantering” is not always positive or productive. A theme inherent in my past assessment experience is internal communication issues. Limited information for faculty regarding the assessment process invariably led to questioning and, in extreme cases, outright mistrust of the administration’s intentions. While there were those among us who realized the process was centered on assessing student learning, there were a number questioning every step in the process.
My previous institution was a two-year community college infused with trade and technical programs. Faculty in these programs typically had little or no previous professional teacher training. They were hired because of their content knowledge, not their methodological abilities. Hence, I assume assessment strategies were a foreign concept. This is by no means an indictment of their abilities to teach content, but from personal experience, the learning curve regarding teaching methodology (in effect becoming a better instructor) can be steep. This observation is a result of my serving as a mentor to new faculty in trade and technical programs.
When administration began giving out “nuggets” on upcoming assessment requirements, there were faculty members who immediately began questioning the process. In reflecting on one of these assessments, the following issues arose:
- Perception the administration was being “heavy-handed” in dealing with upcoming assessment processes.
- The Assessment “Sky is Falling” Syndrome.
“Oh no, here we go again.” “The VP was at another assessment conference, what is it going to be this time?"
- Questioning the administration’s commitment to assessment. Just prior to one assessment stage, the position of institutional researcher was cut due to a reduction in force process. Faculty questioned the commitment of administration to assessment as institutional research was considered a key component of a successful process.
- Concerns the process was a front for faculty evaluation, not true program assessment.
Coming full-circle was the issue. The reason the process was problematic was the lack of communicating the intricacies and benefits of a well-designed assessment process. For assessment to be effective, a formative process must be implemented to ensure perceived program weaknesses are addressed through curricular and institutional changes. Hence the process can come full circle.
Allen sums the above concept with the following:
“Assessment programs are likely to fail if faculty and administrators forget the purpose of their efforts. Assessment studies examine student learning in the entire program; they should not focus on individual students or faculty. The purpose is not to assign blame, but rather to identify program strengths, areas of concern, and solutions that faculty are willing to implement” (p. 157).
Your experiences and comments in this regard are appreciated.
I don't think your experience is much different than mine in a small community college setting. I think of it as a high school party out in the middle of no where when all of a sudden the cops showed up...everyone scatters and the last one standing there better be able to explain what the "bleep" has been going on. There is also the fact that we too have had several faculty, without actual teacher training, that know what they want their students to achieve by the end of the semester and don't appear to have a problem doing it. However, somewhere down the line confusion sets in and suggests that by trying to measure overall student learning, faculty evaluation comes into play. Perhaps it becomes an administrative issue and the communication gap can easily be closed if a memo is posted on each door of the faculty offices? Of course this should be done in a non threatening way:)
ReplyDeleteI think Allen says it nicely in your quote. Maybe posting a quote like this on the walls of an institution, next to copy machine, coffee machines, and help wanted areas would send up a red flag. "It isn't always about YOU, but those that are sitting in the seats in front of you!"
We are on the same page Lane...
ReplyDeleteDifferent party, different state, same result:)
The Chronicle has several references to 'our' situation when it comes to assessment, learning, and faculty incentives to improve. Two year colleges present issues slightly differnt than a university. Faculty tend to be required to do the optional work on various committees and other campus activities. There is an interesting article from Jan. 24, 2010 by David Glenn which is titled "Educators Mull How to Motivate Professors to Improve Teaching" and brings up several of these issues.
ReplyDeleteI have a difficult time remembering my high school days---to long ago I guess-- so Lane's comment on the party went over my head.
Thank you for these postings. Communication and collaboration is essential in the assessment and accreditation process. Institutional committment at the top levels is essential to garnering faculty and staff buy-in for assessment efforts. Dr. Stammen's frequent observation that we must "begin with the end in mind" is very pertinent here. Assessment needs to be linked with accreditation and both need to be ongoing processes. When this continuing process can be seen, faculty, staff, and students are more likely to see the value of the process. I agree that institutional research also play an important role in this process.
ReplyDeleteRegarding buy-in, there may be some approaches that can help:
-transparency of the process
-empowerment: helping faculty see that what they are doing is important and valued (sometimes this has been cynically referred to as "stroking a person's ego")
-recognition: acknowledging faculty contributions to the assessment process through means such as a campus spotlight in press releases
-the approach is important also: I have always liked the notion of "the velvet glove versus the iron hand". Resistance is likely to diminish when the process is not viewed as threatening or intimidating. How something is approached is often as important, or even more important, than the subject itself.