Those who are new to the culture of assessment—and this includes
students, faculty, and administrators alike—sometimes respond a bit
skeptically to all this talk about assessment. We should be honest
and up front about such initial skepticism. We need to explore this
resistance and work through it so that any resultant assessment
approaches are not perceived as mandates arbitrarily imposed upon
faculty and students, but legitimate components of learning valued
by all parties.
Students, for example, when asked to write self-reflection
responses in which they evaluate their own work and progress (just
one of many different forms of assessment used in high school and
college courses today), don’t always see the value in such an
activity. “Why are you making us do all this extra work,” they
might wish to ask their professor; “why can’t you just give us our
grade and be done with it?”
Faculty can also respond to this culture of assessment with a few
raised eyebrows. This is understandable and logical. If faculty
have been teaching for several decades quite comfortably without
having to actively engage in assessment activities, and then are
suddenly expected to articulate measurable learning objectives, it
is only natural that they demand some evidence and justification
for such a major shift. Faculty are independent thinkers who take
their pedagogical and intellectual autonomy quite seriously, as
well they should. So it’s only normal that this paradigm shift in
assessment (and any pedagogical paradigm shift for that matter) is
not immediately embraced by every faculty member. This is why it is
the responsibility of both administration and faculty, working
together, to explore best practices in assessment.
Just one example: sometimes faculty tend to respond to this new
culture of assessment by asking, “What’s wrong with the way I—not
to mention Universities for more than a century—have been assessing
students? The University pays professors like me to teach them and
judge their work and assess them with a grade. I’ve been doing that
from day one, so why all this emphasis on measuring learning
outcomes?” This is a fair response, and it is important that we
address it head-on as we recognize why traditional grading
practices are, by themselves, no longer enough. (Yes, grading is a
method of assessment. But it is limited in what it tells us about
student learning. Assessment involves a variety of means of
collecting ideas and data—from students and one’s colleagues—that
in turn help enhance faculty teaching methods, which in turn
enhance student performance. The mere existence of grades doesn’t
necessarily mean there is much significant learning taking place on
either side.)
And administrators too—even when placed in the position of being
advocates and promoters of assessment—are themselves sometimes
overwhelmed (if not occasionally exhausted) by the new expectations
that come with this culture of assessment. They too, with their
faculty colleagues, sometimes look back to their jobs several
decades prior, fondly reminiscing about all of that extra time they
must have had when the vocabulary of assessment had not yet entered
their daily working vocabularies.
As we enter this new
culture of assessment, it’s important to understand that as
educators we have always been assessing. Reflecting upon the
effectiveness of our teaching—our ability to meet our goals while
maintaining a flexible and open-minded approach to our
pedagogies--is integral to any good teaching and learning
experience. Faculty develop courses, assign projects, require tasks
of their students. Then information is collected from students—not
just test grades, but such things as portfolios, focus groups and
student conferences, writing samples, surveys, and other forms of
feedback. This data helps us learn where our programs and courses
are working and where things can be improved. Then, faculty revisit
assignments, curricula, and programs for further enhancement. This
is the assessment feedback loop, and it is ongoing. Faculty never
reach a point where there is nothing new to learn about our
students’ performances.
Our goals:
- Understand that initial skepticism and resistance to calls for
assessment among faculty are understandable and logical, and not
inherently signs of apathy or disinterest.
- Develop contexts where faculty, students, and administrators
can explore the intrinsic value in reflecting upon our
learning.
- Design means by which faculty can see that assessment creates
ongoing opportunities to better understand their students, their
colleagues, their institution, and their own (always evolving)
disciplines.
- Ensure that our assessment policies are informed by all cohorts
(students, faculty, administration), are integrated into the daily
activities of the departments and institution, and do not manifest
in little more than busywork for faculty.