Missouri State > CAIS > Academy for the Assessment of Student Learning > Application to the Higher Learning Commission
Center for Assessment and Instructional Support
Application to the Higher Learning Commission
ACADEMY APPLICATION
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY SPRINGFIELD, MO JUNE 28, 2006
Name of Institution City, State Application Date
Preferred Point of Entry to the Academy:
__X___ Fall 2006
_____ Spring 2007
_____ Summer 2007
Application Questions:
Recent Efforts (Assessment Story)
The 2005 HLC site team mentioned assessment at Missouri State as one of its strengths. The final team report states, “The institution’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness while also suggesting strategies and direction for continuous improvement.” In addition, the team report states, “The assessment of student learning outcomes is provided in multiple modes across all divisions, programs, and course types at the University. Students, faculty, and staff regularly engage the challenges of effective teaching and improving student learning. There is a clearly developed educational culture that supports and expects outcomes assessment positioning the institution and its educational processes for ongoing improvements.” This culture of assessment began in 1987 when Missouri State University established the Center for Assessment and Instructions Support (CAIS). At that time, the director reported directly to the vice president for academic affairs and, with the establishment of the office of Provost, to the associate provost for undergraduate programs. The early days of the center’s work involved encouraging departments to document and develop a variety of assessments of courses and programs. Also founded in 1987, the assessment council (AC) is a faculty group that acts in an advisory capacity to the CAIS director and as a communication vehicle for Missouri State University colleges and departments.
In 1993 an assessment plan, Plan for Improved Student Learning and Assessment, was submitted to the North Central Association. The 1995 NCA continuing accreditation site team offered suggestions for improvement but did not list assessment as an area of concern. Missouri State was under no mandate for a focused visit or even a report after the 1995 site visit. We are under no current mandate for a focused visit or report after this current visit. The complete 2005 team report is available on our
Much of the University’s assessment coordination occurs through the work of the CAIS. Since its inception, the CAIS has coordinated the collection and reporting of outcome information that is incorporated into system, institutional, and department plans; self-studies; five-year campus reviews;
Missouri Department of Higher Education reviews; the Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Self-Study; and other accreditation self-studies. The intent of the reported outcomes is to provide evidence that the University is meeting its educational goals/mission. The primary purpose of this information, however, is to provide support for decisions designed to improve student learning
outcomes.
The AC and CAIS ensure that the University provides a data pool of specific information on learning outcomes in general education, academic majors, employability, lifelong learning and public affairs. This information (represented in Chart Q ) has included assessments in public affairs that incorporate items related to diversity, values, citizenship, and participation in society. The AC also supports assessment of student learning outcomes through documentation review, information collected and
provided to the University community, and resources made available to internal and external constituents.
A chronological overview of some of the CA and CAIS assessment work follows.
¨ Initially, AC members from each college sought assessment information from a number of resources within their respective colleges to provide an overview of the University’s assessment activities. Council members also reviewed and discussed departmental assessment reports that are maintained by the CAIS. This process provided a forum for talking about what is occurring with assessment in their colleges, what the Council can do to help with assessment, and what the Council needs from Academic Affairs and the CAIS. Predictably, the Council discovered that assessment practices are more numerous in program areas that are accredited by outside agencies.
¨ The AC evaluated the CAIS Plan for Improved Student Learning and Assessment, actions, and publications. The AC reviewed and made recommendations to the director for CAIS activities at regular Council meetings. The AC also created a plan for formal and systematic review that evaluates the unit reports relative to the guidelines that were given with the request for reports. The review included a format that provides feedback to the academic units.
¨ In 2003, representatives reviewed the AC structure and responsibilities and decided to maintain representation from each college because of the importance of the representatives’ roles in maintaining communication within the academic units.
¨ As a result of the AC discussions of assessment within colleges in 2004, two recommendations were forwarded to the Faculty Senate Chair and to the Faculty Handbook Revision Committee Chair:
¨ That curricular change forms include the question, “Were assessment results used to determine this change and if so, how?” The purpose was to encourage and document the use of assessment data in making decisions about course changes in academic programs.
¨ That course objectives be required in course syllabi and policy statements; if adopted, this requirement will be included in the revised faculty handbook.
¨ In 2004, the Faculty Senate and Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Director of CAIS and the AC Chair, reorganized the AC. The number of representatives was reduced, making the Council a more manageable, coherent, and active group. The two representatives from each college were reduced to one. The AC includes a representative of the academic administration named by the Provost; an undergraduate and a graduate student, named by the Student Government Association; a representative of the University Planning and Advisory Council; and the director of the CAIS. Institutional Research and Continuing Education representatives were removed; however, they are invited to attend meetings when agenda items address issues related to their areas.
Assessment at Missouri State has evolved from “thinking about assessment” to departments “doing assessment” to “using assessment to improve student success and learning.”
Needs, Goals, and Desired Results
1. What are your most pressing needs that you expect to be addressed via your participation?
The university’s most pressing need is to further integrate student learning and assessment in a broader sense. Current program review processes must become more effective. The current program review process could be a more meaningful process if it were integrally linked with assessment plans, budgeting processes, and long-range planning. We are currently addressing this disconnect. To more effectively assess student learning co-curricular and extra-curricular must be included in the assessment plan. The new plans will include assessment of co-curricular and extra-curricular programs
as they influence student learning. We also wish to continue developing a “culture of inquiry” that values assessment as a research process for the understanding and assessment of learning.
2. What specific goals and benefits do you what to accomplish through the Academy?
Our specific goals are to
¨ implement a more meaningful program review process and to seek external feedback during this process so that we not only learn from the program review but also from the process;
¨ use currently available data (in abundance) to assess programs, student learning, student retention and other goals of program review;
¨ design/implement additional assessments (where needed or not documented) to assess programs, student learning and other goals of program review;
¨ develop a university-wide assessment plan for student success that includes academic affairs and student affairs; and
¨ continue to investigate further integration of assessment, student learning improvement and accountability.
3. How do you perceive your goals and desired results will contribute to student learning?
Although the university assessment plan focuses on student learning outcomes and we are striving to develop a culture of assessment on our campus the program review process on our campus in the past has not focused enough on student learning. The new process of program review, when integrated with assessment plans, should help us to focus more directly on student learning. All claims made in program review are to be evidence based. Participation in the Academy should help us to implement these integrated plans.
Commitment, Leadership, and Capacity
4. What evidence demonstrates your commitment to and capacity for assessment of student learning? (Include here things such as evidence of presidential and academic commitment to full participation, plans for involving the people and groups to accomplish your goals, financial and other resource support, inclusion of the broader institutional community.)
In 1995 immediately after the self-study was completed the university president appointed an HLC Review Committee. This committee was charged with reviewing the self-study and team recommendations and to annually report on progress. In addition this team attended NCA/HLC annual meetings on a regular basis to monitor changes in commission policy and criteria. In 2006, President
Michael Nietzel appointed new members for the HLC review committee to continue this monitoring effort and to help make institutional accreditation a continuous process. The 2005 self-study report, as well as related accreditation documents, are available on our website (www.missouri.state.edu – accreditation) and will be used by the review committee as they communicate annual progress.
The Office of the Provost, Student Affairs, Academic Development Center, CAIS, and faculty/staff advisory committees have all agreed that improvement in using assessment to improve student learning is a priority. The Office of the Provost and Student Affairs has agreed to put funds toward this effort.
In support of this new priority a team of five (three from academic affairs and two from student affairs) attended the International Assessment and Retention Conference “Everybody’s Job: Assessment, Accountability, and Retention” sponsored by NASPA in June of 2006. This conference recognizes the integration of student affairs and academic affairs in the assessment and improvement of student learning.
Competing Priorities
6. What other major institutional initiatives, pressing issues, current circumstances, or other priorities might interfere with your intended goals for and full participation in the Academy?
A major institutional issue that will require time and effort by the entire university community and will compete for our time in the near future is a recently adopted compensation plan. This plan involves the evaluation of all faculty and staff. In the coming year evaluation plans will be written for all units.
This plan also affects the Faculty Handbook and the Staff Handbook. These handbooks are undergoing major revisions and will be complete within the year.
On the other hand, the beginning of a new HLC accreditation cycle, a recently inaugurated president, new provost, revised strategic plan and the implementation of the AC review and feedback process for unit assessment reports places Missouri State University in a strategic position for advancement and improvements of student learning. We are ready to plan, select and implement appropriate initiatives in the immediate/near term future.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Primary Academy Contact Person:
Dr. Martha A. Kirker
Director, Center for Assessment and Instructional Support
Missouri State University
901 S. National Ave
Springfield, MO 65897
Phone: 417-836-6300
Fax: 417-836-6486
MarthaKirker@missouristate.edu
Dr. Belinda McCarthy, Provost
Missouri State University
901 S. National Ave.
Springfield, MO 65897
APPLICATION AFFIRMATION
I affirm that the application emailed to academy@hlcommission.org presents our institution accurately, and that we agree, if admitted, to commit to meaningful and productive participation in the four-year Academy for Assessment of Student Learning.
Dr. Michael T. Nietzel, President
Missouri State University
901 S. National Ave.
Springfield, MO 65897