Seminole State College

Focused Visit on Assessment of Student Learning Report

Final Draft as of September 7, 2003

The best thing we can do for our students and our faculty is bring them to a place where they can see for themselves not only what they are learning and teaching, not only why they are learning and teaching certain things, but how this process is taking place, for what end, and to what level of success.  As a teacher, I've often found students who struggle do so more often than not because they have never been given the confidence that they could actually learn, and have never been shown in any practical way that they are actually learning (Anonymous teacher quoted in Lopez, 1999, p. 22).

INTRODUCTION

            The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (HLC/NCA) conducted a comprehensive continuing accreditation site visit of Seminole State College (SSC) in March 2000. The visiting team validated the institution’s Self-Study and recognized the College for numerous strengths. The team concluded “that Seminole State College definitely does meet all of the General Institutional Requirements and that it does satisfy the Criteria for Accreditation.” The team recommended and HLC/NCA awarded the College accreditation for a second ten-year period. However, the team identified three areas for review of SSC’s progress on assessment of student learning outcomes for a focused visit in 2003-2004. They are:

1.     Identifying goals, objectives, and learning outcomes that are measurable and publicly stated for all its courses and academic programs;

2.     Developing and using direct measures of learning outcomes for all courses and academic programs; and

3.     Implementing its plan to assess general education skills across the cognitive, behavioral, and affective domains at the program level. This assessment program at the program level will include direct measures of student learning, appropriate feedback loops, and a demonstration of how the information gained is being utilized to improve student learning (Self-Study Site Report, 2000).

                The purpose of this focused visit report is to delineate the progress Seminole State College (SSC) has made in the assessment of student learning since the March 2000 site team visit.  The report addresses each of the three specific areas of concern the team identified.  Furthermore, it provides a contextual framework for discussing the College's progress.  The report summarizes the measures that respond to each area of concern within the whole of the College's assessment of student learning process.

The focused visit report is organized in three sections, each corresponding to an area the team specified for a progress review. Moreover, the response details the committed, purposeful, and aggressive actions the College has undertaken to address assessment of student learning outcome concerns. These actions include:

·        Reorganization of the Assessment of Student Learning Committee to include students, faculty members, staff and administration and to provide a systematic method of membership rotation;

·        Inclusive and systematic in-service workshops, planning sessions and professional development on assessment of student learning throughout development and implementation of the College’s assessment program;

·        Formal identification and public statement of multiple direct and indirect measures of student learning;

·        Implementation of a measurable Course-Embedded Assessment Program for use in all courses leading to Associate in Arts and Associate in Science Degree programs;

·        Implementation of systematic direct and indirect assessment measures in all courses leading to Associate in Applied Science Degree programs;

·        Formal design and implementation of a program of student expectations and outcomes with embedded linkage of General Education Student Expectations, Departmental Learner Outcomes, Expected Learner Outcomes and Enabling Objectives with specific attention to cognitive, affective, and behavioral domains of learning in establishing expectations, outcomes, and objectives, publicly stated in revised syllabi;

·        Implementation of Discipline (departmental) Assessment connecting the College's Mission to expectations and outcomes;

·        Implementation of General Education Assessment connecting the College’s Mission to expectations and outcomes;

·        Implementation of Degree Program Assessment relevant to the College’s Mission;

·        Identification of multiple assessment methods and criteria at each assessment level that include direct and indirect measures for triangulation purposes, reporting actual assessment results, and determining analysis and action; and

·        Dissemination of data from the Course, Discipline (departmental), General Education and Degree Program levels of assessment, closing feedback loops and tying resulting actions to the College’s budgeting and planning processes .

As a result of these multiple actions during the past three years, the College has made significant progress in strengthening its systematic and routine method of assessment. As faculty members express ownership, comfort and confidence with the program, assessment has become more highly utilized at the course, discipline, general education, and degree program levels.

Administrative support, under the leadership of President James W. Utterback, Ph.D., and Vice President for Academic Affairs Rebecca Kennedy, Ph.D., has been strong and pervasive. The College is committed to the continued growth and refinement of the assessment of student learning program for the specific purpose of achieving its educational mission on behalf of the individuals and communities it serves.

            The College formed a faculty-led writing team to prepare this Focused Visit on Assessment of Student Learning Report.  Pam Koenig, a highly respected faculty member who has served on the Assessment Committee since 2000, is Team Chair.  The Assistant Chair is Larry Vickers, a retired faculty member who is Assessment of Student Learning Coordinator.  Additionally, the writing team is composed of three Unit Chairs; three Assistant Unit Chairs (one of whom is an HLC/NCA Consultant Evaluator); a Chair of Graphs, Charts, and Appendices; and a Copy Editor. All Unit Chairs are full-time faculty members.  All others are full-time faculty members or faculty members with other administrative responsibilities.  The Vice President for Academic Affairs serves on the writing team in an advisory capacity (Appendix B).