Chapter 23-What Do Students Know and What Can They Do? Flashcards
What did reports on educations systems do and what was the reaction from education systems?
- Questioned efficacy of educational systems, called for greater accountability for student learning.
- Systematic assessment of goals at institutional, program, and individual student levels.
What do programs like CACREP now require of academic programs?
- Systems and procedures that provide concrete, direct evidence of student learning
- Report assessment outcomes to public that is readily understandable
With respect to counselor education program accreditation, CACREP (2009) specifies that program faculty engage in:
- “continuous systematic program evaluation indicating how the mission, objectives, and student learning outcomes are measured and met”
- Emphasize what students know and are able to do
Assessment data in the emerging, learner-centered model aims to improve:
- curricula, pedagogies, and decision making
2. direct evidence that program goals and expectations for student learning have been achieved.
Planning to create effective systems for program evaluation requires a number of what factors?
- Systematic collection of assessment information over time
- Evaluation clear and focused on program improvement
- Variety of assessment strategies.
- Plan must include how faculty will implement strategies
Assessment is characterized by four elements:
- continuousness
- focus on program development
- variety of strategies at multiple times in program
- ownership by the faculty (designed by them)
What are the purposes of formative and summative assessments in the counseling program?
- Formative: determine what students have learned throughout a course or program
- Summative: determine whether students have acquired the appropriate knowledge or demonstrated the needed skill
RE: assessment, faculty need to be actively engaged in discussions about:
- What and how they teach
- their expectations of students
- how courses in programs link together
- Where resources need to be shifted to align with priorities
What is California State University, Chico process including four phases for planning assessments?
(1) determining learning goals (outcomes)
(2) naming learning processes and assessment measures
(3) determining assessment processes
(4) making decisions and recommendations
What is the fundamental question that guides assessment plan development?
What will our graduates know, be able to do, and believe as a result of their enrollment in our degree programs?
Describe “Program goals.”
Broad statements about student learning
Describe “Individual student learning outcomes.”
- Specific statements of what students achieve in a particular degree program
- Levels of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and abilities students attain as a result of participating in a particular degree program
Describe knowledge outcomes.
Disciplinary or professional content that students recall and deploy
Describe Skills outcomes.
Refer to what students have learned to do (e.g., “Conduct mental status exam”).
Describe Attitudinal outcomes.
Changes in, or the development of, certain values (e.g., “Demonstrate empathy, warmth, and positive regard”).
Describe Abilities.
Integration of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are applicable to different situations (e.g., “Engage in reflective practice and decision making”).
Learning processes consist of:
Curricular and co-curricular strategies used to teach the content and/or skills students need to demonstrate the outcome.
Once learning outcomes are established, program faculty identify the information needed to assess student learning. Guiding questions may be:
- “What information is needed to assess this outcome?”
- “Where might the most reliable/valid information be found?”
- “How will the information be collected?”
Assessment strategies might consist of:
- Assessments in prerequisite courses
- Pre-post measures at the beginning ending of program
- Exit interviews and surveys
- Standardized tests, faculty-developed comprehensive examinations
- Portfolio ratings by multiple faculty