Information about student outcomes informs planning, program review and assessment through the processes of continuous examination of outcome results and by the Annual Report.
The purpose of assessment is to use assessment results to improve student learning, or “close the loop.” Closing the loop is arguably the most difficult aspect of the assessment process. The “loop” is closed when data from an assessment activity is analyzed and used to improve student learning by changing the way content is learned or by changing the measure.
This table illustrates the process of closing the loop at the program level. Examples follow.
Fall Semesters
Action | Responsible Parties | Notes |
Assessment in majors and stand-alone minors | Divisions with Assessment Team support | Course-embedded and non-course-embedded resources employed |
Essential Studies (General Education) assessment | Essential Studies faculty with Essential Studies Committee (ESC) assistance | LEAP ELO certified in spring of the previous year assessed |
Major/Minor and ES Annual Reports for previous year completed | Division Chairs, Assessment Team and Essential Studies Committee | Important Findings, Course-embedded activities, Non-course-embedded resources, and Prior Year Review |
Prior Year Review section of Annual Report | Division Chairs, Assessment Team and Essential Studies Committee | Verifies actions, learning impacts and learning impact extensions via the Status Report section of the Assessment Reports and other evidence. |
Major/Minor and ES Annual Reports for previous year evaluated | Assessment Team and Essential Studies Committee | Overall and individual component scores provided; reported to divisions and ESC |
Spring Semesters
Action | Responsible Parties | Notes |
Assessment in majors and stand-alone minors | Divisions with Assessment Team support | Course-embedded and non-course-embedded resources employed |
Essential Studies assessment | Essential Studies faculty with Essential Studies Committee (ESC) assistance | LEAP ELO certified in spring of the previous year assessed |
ES and LEAP Capstone course verification submission | ES and LEAP Capstone faculty with Essential Studies Committee (ESC) assistance | LEAP Capstones and courses already certified as ES submit verification requests for the current ELO. |
ES course certification submission | ES faculty with Essential Studies Committee (ESC) assistance | Courses not already certified as ES submit certification forms for the current and all previous ELOs. |
Certification and verification review | Essential Studies Committee | ESC reviews certification and verification requests for alignment with ELO definitions and VALUE Rubrics. |
Major/Minor and ES Annual Reports results presented to Cabinet | Director of Assessment | Cabinet offers suggestions and recommendations |
Annual Report debriefing meeting | Assessment Team and Essential Studies Committee | Successes and failures are discussed. Adjustments to the assessment process are discussed and implemented. |
Major/Minor Prior Year Review
Finding: Summer blocks allowed students to apply their knowledge through the STEM for Kids experience. This allowed them to work with children and families.
Action Plan: The order courses were offered for this block of summer 2014 students is different than it has been in the past. In the past students received two summer blocks, learning teaching strategies before taking social studies strategies and language and literacy in early elementary. The INTASC assessment scores show that students struggled learning strategies and applying them in the same six week summer block.
Action Implementation: Summer block has been revamped, what was initially considered the 1st summer block is now spread out over two semesters of online courses. The second summer block is now on campus only and is still conducted in the same 6 week format. The evidence for this would be found in the 2015-2016 Mayville State University Course Catalog.
Verified Impact: Second summer block is evidenced in 2015-2016 Mayville State University Course Catalog (p. 93). INTASC scores, “INTASC scores reflected a 40% of the students are continuing to progress in the area of working with families and adjusting to learning differences.”
Description and example of an Assessment Report from a course in the BS and BSEd Chemistry majors
Physical Chemistry professor, Tom Gonnella, designed a lab in which students assembled an education spectrophotometer, calibrated their spectrophotometer, collected the gaseous hydrogen and deuterium emission spectra on their notebook computers, and compared the spectra to each other denoting any subtle changes in the spectra that could be attributed to the additional neutron in deuterium. All but the last step of this experiment was used to evaluate the students’ proficiency in using technology (SLO 5). Students did not meet target expectations. The four students in the course scored 2, 2, 3, and 5 out of 12 possible points. Under the specified two hour time period, the designed task was well beyond the current capability of the students. Dr. Gonnella’s proposed action for his instruction was to provide better written instructional materials. To improve the assessment process, he decided to distribute the assessment activity over two lab periods and evaluate each separately. Student performance on this activity improved considerably such that it was deemed a success. To increase the focus on higher order thinking, in the next assessment cycle, students will be asked to critically evaluate the spectra collected, in addition to collecting the spectra. This activity will be used to assess SLO 4 critical thinking/analysis.
| Fall 2012 Participating Area: Chemistry B.S. and B.S. Ed. Program Student Learning Outcome Assessed: SLO 5 Assessment Plan Measure Title (Enter the Course Prefix, Number and Name): CHEM 466L Survey of Physical Chemistry Lab Measure Type/Method: Direct - Exam Measure Level: Program Details/Description: As one of the last labs performed in the our Survey of Physical Chemistry lab course (CHEM 466L), our students assemble an education spectrophotometer, calibrate their spectrophotometer, collect the gaseous hydrogen and deuterium emission spectra on their notebook computers, and compare the spectra to each other denoting any subtle changes in the spectra that can be attributed to the additional neutron in deuterium. All but the last step of this experiment will now be used to allow us to evaluate the students’ ability to demonstrate their proficiency in using technology. Acceptable Target: 50% of the students will score at least 9 (of 12) points. Ideal Target: 75% of the students will score at least 9 (of 12) points. Delivery Mode: Mayville face-to-face Key/Responsible Personnel: Tom Gonnella Assessment Findings Summary of Findings: Using the original rubric, the four students in the course scored 2, 2, 3, and 5 out of 12 possible points. Under the specified two hour time period, the designed task was well beyond the current capability of the students. Reflection on the Assessment Process: Although the written materials provided were pretty good, better written materials could have been provided to the students. Reflection on the Instructional Process: Too often students are working with lab partners that assist/carry them in conducting labs. Acceptable Target Achievement: Not met. Ideal Target Achievement: Not met. Action Plan Action Item Title: CHEM 466L Survey of Physical Chemistry Lab Expected actions to improve Student Learning: Provide better written materials. Expected Actions to Improve the Assessment Process: Spread the assessment activity over two lab periods and evaluate each separately. Initial Action Implementation Timeline: Fall 2014 Criteria for Achieving Action: Change syllabus to indicate change in course due to previous assessment. Budget Request amount: $0 Priority Level: High Status Report Current Status: Completed Budget Status: 0 Describe the results of the Actions Taken: The student performance on this activity improved considerable such that it was deemed a success. Next Steps: To increase the focus on higher order thinking, students will be asked to critically evaluate the spectra collected, in addition to collecting the spectra. This activity will be used to assess SLO 4 - critical thinking/analysis. Screen Shot of the CHEM 466L Status Report | |
Please wait...