Outcomes
Assessment
Reports
a newsletter and Web log
by Frank Vozzo
 
Director of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
 

 
December 5, 2005

In this report:

In order to assess learning outcomes, one first needs to define what the expected outcomes are.  The words “goal” and “objective” are used quite freely in the assessment arena, but even the veterans of outcomes assessment can disagree on their meaning.

Both words describe attributes we want our students to have by the time they graduate.  Until recently, I thought that the words only reflected a hierarchy—goals are broad (general) and objectives are narrow (specific).  Douglas J. Eder, one of the country’s leading assessment experts, defines goal and objective this way:

So a program objective is something that will demonstrate that a goal has been achieved (objectives are indicators of goals).

Bloom’s Taxonomy defines six levels of learning: knowledge, understanding, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.  These are useful in the development of course or program objectives, such as “by the time the course/program is completed, the student will be able to…”

(You don’t necessarily have to have one objective at each level—these are just examples.)  Goals, on the other hand, defy organization by level and may look similar between major programs and general education:

That’s in part because major programs and general education typically derive some of their goals from a common origin: institutional mission. 

In addition, when assessing the outcomes of general education one must look to the major programs to find much of the tangible evidence.  For example, at the synthesis level of learning, one might find (if one looks for it) a senior psychology major applying an aspect of general education (perhaps one of the objectives in the cross-cultural or WLD-120 course) in designing a research project.

One of the strengths of our current general education assessment plan at RSC (see CampusCruiser/My Cruiser/Dashboard/My Committees/TSC Faculty Staff and Administrators/Shared Files/Institutional Research and Planning/Middle States/Middle States appendices.doc pp. 128-134) is that we do look at the elements of general education as they relate to the majors.  Last year, we took a hard look at writing and research skills of upper division students in their majors, and made some changes that should ultimately strengthen the majors.  But to really measure our students’ writing abilities and track them over time, we need a portfolio system across all majors.  We’ve taken the first steps in that direction: introducing all new students to electronic portfolios in the First Year Experience (FYE-101) pilot course, and looking as an institution toward adopting one electronic portfolio system for general use.

Reference/further reading:

Douglas J. Eder, “General Education Assessment Within the Disciplines,” JGE: The Journal of General Education, Vol. 53, No. 2, 2004, pp. 135-157.  The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

I welcome comments and questions about the material presented in this Web log.  I received an e-mail from a colleague in reaction to a statement I made in last week’s OARs.  He had this to say about grades and learning:

“Good grades offer reasonable evidence that learning has occurred successfully, at least in the short term.  However, as we all come to recognize, that is not a reliable indication that the learning will produce a lasting impression, which is immediately apparent in the future.  My optimistic view about this is that once a subject has been truly learned, most of it remains in a retrievable mental state well into the future.  However, in most cases, people must make a deliberate effort to review (actually retrieve) the subject, before they are really prepared to use it in new circumstances.  Fortunately, that review can be accomplished more easily than taking up a subject for the very first time.”

I agree completely with that.  My new objective is for forensic science students to at least be able to recognize (within one year of course completion, and on their own) that general physics can be useful to them, and for them to want to "relearn" some of it in doing the work of their more advanced courses.  While I do expect a student who has taken just the one year introductory course sequence to demonstrate learning at the "knowledge" level (and maybe up to the "analysis" level), I don't expect learning at the "synthesis" level (as might be expected of a physics major who takes many courses in the discipline).  Do you think I'm setting the bar too low?

At one of the plenary sessions of the IUPUI Assessment Institute, the assessment director of Georgia Institute of Technology, J. Joseph Hoey, speculated that funded project-based assessment of general education is the wave of the future.  In this model, a college or university requires that every student participate in a group senior project, with peer student partners from a variety of disciplines (majors).  The project serves as a window through which the learning outcomes from the students’ experiences over four years can be observed and measured.  The project can be developed in conjunction with and for the benefit of an external sponsor, who helps to pay for the costs.  If the whole process is planned correctly, it can serve as the primary way to assess general education—one can demonstrate that deep learning has taken place. Deep learning (or expert learning) is a phrase from the assessment vocabulary; it means “active learning reinforced over an extended time” facilitated by a curriculum rather than an individual course (Douglas J. Eder).

Does this sound at all familiar?  It should—the course WLD-420 “Women Changing the World” (follow the link to a course description; for department select "ITD") in the WORLD general education program at RSC fits the model very well.  At SCA, the LIFE general education program includes the Interdisciplinary Seminar (ITD) course (follow the link to the course descriptions; for department select "ITD"), coupled with another course in the major providing “an experiential learning opportunity.”  We should be proud of the fact that we have general education programs with such a progressive feature.  However, we should think of ways to embed useful assessment of the entire general education experience into the tasks students perform in these culminating interdisciplinary-project courses.

 

In next week's OARs: the Minute Paper.

Home...