Terry Rhodes: Show Me the Learning: Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE)

Show Me the Learning: Valid Assessment of Learning inUndergraduate Education (VALUE) Terrel L. Rhodes Association of American Colleges and Universities WASC Resource Fair January 2012

Survey Results Are Consistent Everyone – business, policy makers, faculty, students - wants better learning ANDbetter information, compelling evidence on what students know and are able to do… whether for personal development, program assessment, accreditation or hiring a new employee.

Major VALUE Project Activities• National advisory board [12 members]• Rubric collection and creation of 15 metarubrics by teams [over 100 individual faculty and others]• Piloting and refining metarubrics through three cycles of leadership campus use (using e- portfolios of student work [over 100 campuses, including 12 leadership campuses]• Final reliability and ease-of-use check with national panel of 40 academics, employers, teachers, community members

Outcomes for the development of metarubrics: • Inquiry and analysis • Critical thinking • Creative thinking • Written communication • Oral communication • Quantitative literacy • Information literacy • Reading • Teamwork • Problem solving • Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global • Intercultural knowledge and competence • Ethical reasoning and action • Foundations and skills for lifelong learning • Integrative learning

Commonalities among rubricsMotivated by: Need for among-campus communication Mobile students, transfer Belief that, in spite of uniqueness, core outcomes are shared

VALUE Rubrics & Assessment Rubrics BasicsCriteria

VALUE Rubrics & Assessment Rubrics Basics Levels

VALUE Rubrics & Assessment Rubrics Basics Performance Descriptors

Validity and Usability• Over 3000 distinct institutions have downloaded one or more of the VALUE rubrics for use since fall 2010• Over 11,000 distinct individuals have downloaded one or more of the VALUE rubrics for use• 3 major consortia are using VALUE rubrics for cross institutional collaboration – Connect2Learning – LaGuardia College/AAEEBL (FIPSE) – 23 campuses; Integrative Portfolio Process – Michigan (FIPSE) – 6 campuses; RAILS – Syracuse (Institute for Museum and Library Studies ACRL) – 10 campuses

Reliability Study• 40 Faculty• 4 Traditional Disciplinary Divisions – Humanities, Social Sciences, STEM, Professions• Three VALUE rubrics – Critical Thinking, Civic Engagement, Integrative Learning• Common set of student portfolio work• Agreement = .66 without norming; .8 normed• Another set of 5 campuses, using same set of rubrics with 500 samples of student work – still analyzing

Building the Evidentiary Base • University of Kansas – Representing ResultsPercent of Ratings Critical Thinking: Issues, Analysis, and Conclusions Inter-rater reliability = >.8

Building the Evidentiary Base • University of Kansas – Representing Results Critical Thinking: Evaluation of Sources and EvidencePercent of Ratings

Building the Evidentiary Base - Kansas ―VALUE added‖ for 4 years - writingPercent of Ratings

Building the Evidentiary Base• University of Kansas – • ―analysis of the data from the AACU VALUE rubrics affirmed that a team approach to course design can yield larger improvement in some forms of student writing and thinking‖ • ―We also saw that the rubrics work best when there is close alignment between the nature of the assignment and the dimensions of intellectual skill described in the rubric‖ • ―Finally, at a practical level we are very encouraged that this process is manageable and sustainable‖

Roanoke College WritingReliability = >.8

Using the Results―…we excluded the scores for those instructors and ran frequencies and descriptive statistics on the categories again. We found the means for the rubric categories of Focus and Thesis and Organization remained close to 2.5 with the scores of 2 and 3 occurring most often (approx. 2.4) while most scores for the categories of Evidence and Reasoning were 2s. The category of Style and Mechanics was in the middle with a mean of 2.3. Our adjusted results support what most faculty believe about the writing of our first-year students, they can learn to develop a thesis and organize a paper more effectively than they can provide convincing evidence and strong reasoning to support the thesis.‖

Table 1 Information Literacy Results Building the Evidentiary Base University of North Carolina - Wilmington Table 1. Information Literacy Results Dimension % of Work Products % of Work Products Scored 2 or higher Scored 3 or Higher IL1 Determine Information Needed 87.2% 46.2% IL2 Access Needed Information 89.6% 46.8% IL3 Evaluate Information and Sources 88.5% 39.7% IL4 Use Information Effectively 85.9% 43.6% IL5 Access and Use Information Ethically 93.6% 59.0% Inter-rater reliability = >.8

Alverno College Video of oral presentations First year and last year

Carleton College Sophomore portfolio In the disciplines

Dissemination• Dozens of presentations at accreditation andassessment conferences (US and abroad) andworkshops• Two issues (winter 2009, winter 2011/12) of PeerReview on VALUE rubrics = 9,200 each, 1200institutions• Two Publications: 1) Rubrics = 6500+; 2)e-Portfolios= 2800+ since early 2010 (about to be a book fromJossey-Bass)• Virtually all vendors of e-portfolio software productshave adopted VALUE rubrics• Degree Qualifications Profile [DQP] (Lumina)• Being used worldwide, e.g. Japan, Hong Kong,Australia, United Arab Emirates, Korea• Major state university systems are using VALUErubrics

ContactsTerrel L Rhodes, AAC&U Vice President rhodes@aacu.org http://www.aacu.org/value

http://www.wascsenior.org	971
http://wascsenior.org	119
https://www.wascsenior.org	10
http://wascsenior.ninjastage.com	1

Terry Rhodes: Show Me the Learning: Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE)

by WASC Senior

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 1,101

Statistics