Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Integrating Assessment and Faculty Development


Published on

Integrating Assessment and Faculty Development

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Integrating Assessment and Faculty Development

  1. 1. Impact and Assessment: An Integrated Approach to Faculty Development Will Miller Institutional Research Flagler College Brian Smentkowski Faculty and Academic Development Appalachian State University
  2. 2. Overview • By focusing less on "what we can do" and more on "what we can do together", we can reintroduce a vital sense of community that is necessary for individuals and institutions to succeed. • By leveraging our resources, knowledge, and experience towards common goals, we can build structures that properly identify, support, and enhance faculty and institutional effectiveness.
  3. 3. Overview How Faculty Development and Institutional Research Can Align Institutional and Individual Goals, Objectives, Assessments, and Success Institutional Research Institutional Objectives Faculty Development
  4. 4. Taken for Granted • Data points collected by IR sometimes do not get back to faculty – DWF rates – Graduation rates – Retention rates – Career placement rates – Outcomes • Sometimes this is the fault of IR; sometimes, the faculty
  5. 5. The Goal • We argue that IR data and FD/IR collaborations can provide a necessary sense of direction and also help plan, assess, and document the accomplishment of core institutional objectives. • This debunks the myth that IR data is all about the end game and instead provides a platform for successful evidence-based programming.
  6. 6. Integration and Alignment • Bifurcated implementation leads both sectors – administration and faculty– astray. • Integration and alignment of the institutional mission and the role of the faculty in furtherance of it is essential, but this requires four things: – 1. Knowledge and information–IR data, contextualized in collaboration with FD – 2. shared value/buy-in –using the data to make a case but linking that case to faculty interests and opportunities. – 3. support for innovation and implementation across campus (faculty development, student development, instructionally, and in research) – 4. assessments, both formative and summative (improvement and accountability paradigms)
  7. 7. The Process • In order to determine if these goals are met at the class, program, and institutional level, valid assessments must be developed. • This can spiral fast, so it is important to keep it simple. – When there is alignment of goals and outcomes, the improvement and accountability paradigms can be integrated.
  8. 8. Assessment • Faculty Development and Institutional Research can help the individual and the institution benefit from the same data. • Blending the Improvement and Accountability Paradigms, the same assessment data should be able to… – help the faculty teach – help the students learn – help the institution document steps towards success
  9. 9. Assessment Paradigms Based upon Peter T. Ewell’s Assessment, Accountability, and Improvement: Revisiting the Tension Strategic Dimension: Purpose and Strategy Improvement Paradigm Accountability Paradigm Intent Formative/faculty benefit Summative/institutional reporting Stance Internal. Evidence is gathered to assess learning External. Well-vetted, produces appropriate data Predominant Ethos Engagement Compliance Evidence Gathering Multiple/different methods for different kinds of evidence and courses Standardized Type of Evidence Qualitative or quantitative. Narratives are ok, often useful for buy-in Quantitative. Need to be translated Reference Points Are outcomes met? Can/do they change over time? Comparative (across programs) and fixed (are key markers met?) Communication of results Internally, developmental, consultative Transparent, institutional reporting Use of Results Individual/program improvement Are institutional and organization goals being met?
  10. 10. The Big Picture • Sharing and integrating knowledge is vital. • IR is–ought to be—indispensable here. • Institutionally, this requires some unsiloing. • It requires key personnel to effectively USE and not just have good IR data. • IR data can and should be used to inform and create opportunities for faculty to succeed. • It’s not just assessment–that’s vital, but really just one half of the equation–it’s also a starting point. • IR data and FD/IR collaborations can provide a necessary sense of direction and also help plan, assess, and document the accomplishment of core institutional objectives.
  11. 11. How? • Assuring data is sent to faculty in timely, understandable manner • Utilizing faculty committees to carry the weight with other faculty • Allowing faculty to contribute to interpretation of less academic measures (SSI, NSSE)
  12. 12. Questions?