Senate Document SD 02-3

(Amends SD 98-22)

(As Amended and Approved, click here)

 

 

TO:                     Fort Wayne Senate

 

FROM:               Educational Policy Committee

                           Linda Hite, Chair

 

DATE                 October 4, 2002

 

SUBJECT:         Revisions to SD 98-22 (The Plan for the Assessment of Student Academic Achievement)

 

DISPOSITION   To the presiding officer for implementation

 

 

WHEREAS, Assessment Council has recommended changes (see attached memo from J. Clausen) to SD 98-22; and

 

WHEREAS, The proposed changes support improvement of assessment of general education and improved implementation of current assessment policy and procedures; and

 

WHEREAS, The proposed changes have been reviewed by school representatives and found acceptable;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate revise Senate Document SD 98-22 (The Plan for the Assessment of Student Academic Achievement) to reflect the recommended changes.

 

 

For Educational Policy Committee:

Approving:                              Disapproving              Absent             Non-voting

B. Abbott                                                                                             P. McLaughlin (ex-officio)

H. Broberg

S. Hannah (ex-officio)

L. Hite

D. Oberstar

J. Purse-Wiedenhoeft

 

 

 

Note: Questions concerning this document should be addressed to L. Hite at Ext. 6416.

 

Senate Document SD 02-3

(Amends SD 98-22)

 

 

To:      Educational Policy Committee

From:  Jeanette Clausen, 2001-02 Assessment Council Chair

Date:  September 13, 2002

Subj:   Recommended changes to SD 98-22: The Plan for Assessment of Student Academic Achievement

 

The IPFW Assessment Council and the Task Force on General Education Assessment are recommending several amendments to SD 98-22.  The amendments are described below and indicated in the attached copy of SD 98-22 (text to be deleted is in strikeout; text to be added is in bold).  We ask the Educational Policy Committee to endorse our recommendations and to forward the document to the Senate for approval.

 

1.   Revision of the section on General Education Assessment.  One of the recommendations from the North Central Association last year was that IPFW improve its assessment of General Education (GE).  The previous GE assessment measures consisted of student surveys.  The limitations of this approach were that the measures are indirect rather than direct, and that because the surveys were administered in courses approved for the respective GE areas, the impression was created that we were measuring courses rather than program goals.  The Task Force on GE Assessment has recommended general principles of GE assessment to replace the GE assessment measures described in the current document. The principles provide a framework to guide the Task Force and the General Education Subcommittee in developing a meaningful approach to GE Assessment. 

 

2.   The Council recommends changes in the membership and role of the Assessment Council.  The purpose of the recommended changes is to promote fuller implementation of SD 98-22, which states in section IV. B. 1:

 

      Each school/division assembles the departmental reports, monitors departmental completion of the plans for assessment, evaluates departmental analysis of results, guides the process of changing the program so that goals will be achieved, and considers whether changes in the assessment plan are needed in order to provide better evidence of achievement. 2. Each school and division develops a report on its review and incorporates its own comments and recommendations. With the concurrence of the dean or director, the school/division report is forwarded to the Assessment Council by November 15 of each year.

 

      The proposed changes in the membership and role of the Assessment Council are:

 

      a)   Redefine the Assessment Council to consist of the individuals responsible for school-level review of assessment reports from departments/programs. These individuals should be tenured faculty appointed by the deans.  Depending on school practice, the individual might be an associate dean, the chair of the school’s assessment committee, or hold a similar position.

 

      b)   All school representatives should use the same format and criteria for evaluating department/program assessment reports and should report the results of their reviews back to their departments/programs as well as to the VCAA (through the Assessment Director).

 

      c)   The restructured Assessment Council should meet regularly to compare assessment across school lines and prepare an annual report with recommendations to the VCAA and deans.

 

3.   The Council also recommends changes to the Assessment Calendar.  The deadline for reports from schools/divisions to reach the Assessment Council (November 15) does not seem consistent with a substantive review at the school level.  Therefore, we propose the following:

 

November 1: reports from departments/programs due to school representatives

 

January 15: school-level reviews of department/program reports are sent to departments and to the Assessment Director

 

February/March: Assessment Director convenes the Assessment Council to discuss successes, concerns, etc. and to formulate recommendations to the VCAA and Deans.

 

May 1: Assessment Council Annual Report submitted to VCAA, deans, and EPC.

 

Questions about this document should be addressed to Jeanette Clausen or Steve Sarratore.

 

FOR THE EPC’S “PLAN FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT” FILE CLICK HERE.