1. The document discusses assessing student learning outcomes to determine if students are gaining the intended skills and knowledge from instruction. It emphasizes that student learning outcomes should focus on what students can do rather than inputs like class activities. 2. Good student learning outcomes are measurable, teachable, identify changes in students, and can be used to improve instruction. Direct and indirect assessment methods are described. 3. The document recommends using Bloom's Taxonomy and other frameworks to design learning and assessment at different cognitive levels, and provides examples of assessment activities and pitfalls to avoid.

1. Assessing Student Learning Outcomes (Finding Out If They’re Learning What You Really Want Them To)

2. Why Inputs/Outputs Don’t Work

4. In a Nutshell. . . Inputs and outputs quantify what resources you have to offer Student learning outcomes are the skills or knowledge students acquire

5. Student Learning Objectives Are Measurable Action-oriented Aggregated What can they DO after your teaching that they couldn’t do before?

6. Learning Objectives for This Presentation Mention how assessment must take into account learning styles Students will know a lot about writing good learning objectives Identify instructor’s favorite clothing color

7. Writing Good Objectives for Student Learning Outcomes Is this outcome measurable? Can it be taught? Can a change in the student as a result of learning be identified and/or measured? Can the results be used to improve instruction? Are you measuring the right outcome?

8. Learning Styles

9. How are SLOs measured? (Dugan & Hernon, 2002) Direct Methods Qualitative: developmental portfolios, directed conversations Quantitative: content analysis, evaluation of these/dissertations, tests Indirect Methods Qualitative: focus groups, curriculum & syllabus evaluation, external reviewers Quantitative: general surveys, satisfaction surveys

10. Pop Quiz True or False Use the same method of assessment for all student learning outcomes. Direct methods of assessment analyze the work that students do. Triangulation means studying something from multiple angles using multiple methods to make the analysis stronger.

11. Cognitive Levels of Performance Clark’s content-performance matrix Remember: recall of content Use: application of content List the steps of limiting a MedLINE search Search MedLINE for articles on the adverse effects of smoking and limit to reviews from 2000 and later.

12. Bloom’s Taxonomy

13. Clark’s & Bloom’s Compared

15. In a Nutshell. . . It is important to design learning and assessment activities for multiple cognitive levels. It is sometimes difficult to decide which cognitive levels a specific assignment falls into. Use common sense and vary the activities.

16. Types of Assessment Activities

17. Pretests and Posttests Differentiate between what you taught and what they came in knowing Use a paired samples t -test to check for significance

18. One Minute Paper/Muddiest Point

19. Audience Response Systems High tech Immediate response Facilitates active listening Encourages participation

20. Some Things to Remember Assessment should be embedded in the learning process All instructors who teach the same course need to agree on content and assessment Assessment is iterative

21. Pitfalls to Avoid Using tests with uncertain validity Believing information literacy is only the responsibility of the library Linking assessment to performance appraisals

22. The Assessment Librarian

23. References Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing . New York: Longman. Avery, E. F. (Ed. ). (2003). Assessing student learning outcomes for information literacy instruction in academic institutions. Chicago: American Library Association. Chizmar, J. F., & Ostrosky, A. L. (1998). The one-minute paper: Some empirical findings. The Journal of Economic Education, 29 (1), 1-8. Clark, R., & Harrelson, G. L. (2002). Designing instruction that supports cognitive learning processes. Journal of Athletic Training, 37 (4 Supplement): S-152-S-159.

24. Dugan, R. E., & Hernon, P. (2002). Outcomes assessment: Not synonymous with inputs and outputs. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28, 376-380. Ewell, P. (2003, July/August). The learning curve. BizEd, 28-33. Forehand, M. (2007, July). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Retrieved August 6, 2007 from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/i ndex.php?title=Bloom%27s_Taxonomy Gratch Lindauer, B. (1998). Defining and measuring the library’s impact on campuswide outcomes. College & Research Libraries, 59, 546-570. Iannuzzi, P. (1999). We are teaching, but are they learning: Accountability, productivity, and assessment. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25, 304-305.

25. Jenkins, A. (1996, June 27). How to write learning outcomes. Retrieved August 1, 2007 from http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/format/outcomes.html#top Mann, B. L. (2006). Selected styles in web-based educational research. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, Inc. McGinley, L. (2004, October). Working definitions. Retrieved August 1, 2007 from http://cai.cc.ca.us/ Summer2005Institute/index.htm on 8/1/07 University of Central Florida. (n.d.). Assessment for optimal learning: Classroom assessment. Retrieved July 23, 2007 from http://www.fctl.ucf.edu/assessment/ selectingmethods.html Weinstein, D. (2006, January). Outcomes assessment is here to stay, get faculty buy in. Academic Leader, 1-2.

26. Photo Credits http://www.morguefile.com Darren Hester (slide 21) Kenn Kiser (slides 3 & 14) Derek Benjamin Lilly (slide 5)