|
|
Documents
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES
Introduction:
The following passage (edited) written by Trudy Banta and Catherine
Palomba gives a general overview of some of the important issues
to consider when selecting an assessment methodology or instrument.
We felt that it was a proper introduction for the work that
follows.
To select among assessment instruments, faculty
must discuss and establish their selection criteria and become
familiar with various assessment methods. The most important
selection criteria is whether the method will provide useful
information that indicates whether students are learning and
developing in ways faculty have agreed are important.
Assessment methods must be linked to goals and objectives
for learning and to the instructional activities that support
these goals. For example, future teachers should be observed
interacting with students, not simply examined with a multiple-choice
test. Assessment methods (also called techniques or instruments)
include both direct and indirect approaches. Direct measures
of learning require students to display their knowledge and
skills as they respond to the instrument itself. Objective
tests, essays, presentations, and classroom assignments all
meet this criterion. Indirect methods such as surveys and
interviews ask students to reflect on their learning rather
than demonstrate it.
A further distinction that may be made is between quantitative
methods that rely on numerical scores or ratings and qualitative
methods that rely on descriptions rather than numbers. The
goal of quantitative methods is to provide a narration or
description about what is occurring with emphasis on illuminating
the meaning of behavior.
Because of the rich information they provide, current trends
in assessment include increased use of performance measures
and qualitative approaches. Educators increasingly believe
that assessment itself should contribute to learning. Over
time, educational research has identified conditions that
are beneficial to student learning. The premise of assessment
is that all educators, not just educational researchers, care
about whether their students learn. Based on that premise,
faculty and staff who select and design assessment strategies
need to consider what is known about learning. Because learning
is enhanced by doing, it makes sense to design assessment
strategies that actively engage students. Such methods should
also allow students the chance to receive feedback and respond
to it. All assessment practitioners need not be educational
researchers, but they should ask focused questions about each
assessment strategy. Will it, by itself, enhance student learning?
Will it provide students with opportunities for self-evaluation?
In addition to the methods chosen, faculty must decide when
information will be collected. From students at entry, midpoint,
or exit? From alumni one, two, or five years after graduation?
If students are the source, faculty must decide how the information
will affect student progress. Will it be required or graded?
The site of data collection must also be determined. One possibility
is to create (or take advantage of) data-collection opportunities
outside the classroom. The current trend is to collect assessment
information within classroom, not simply for convenience
but because of the opportunity this provides to use already
in-place assignments and coursework for assessment purposes.
The specific approach that is used needs to reflect the overall
purposes of the assessment program.
(Palomba, C and Banta, T, "The Essentials
of Successful Assessment" in Assessment Essentials: Planning,
Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education,
Jossey-Bass. 1999.)
In the following pages, we look at ten categories of assessment
methodologies, although admittedly there are many variants within
each category. In addition, some specific instruments can be
categorized in many different ways. The categories chosen were
adapted from Jeffrey Seybert's presentation to MCCCD one year
ago at Chandler-Gilbert Community College. For each category,
we try to give a generic definition followed by a list of related
costs, advantages, disadvantages, and implementation issues.
We have also included some recommendations or opinions regarding
applicability of each instrument to Paradise Valley Community
College's general education assessment program.
The categories are:
Although these summaries were designed with our general education
assessment plan in mind, they can be used on many levels. Each
instrument could be used in the classroom, at the program or
department level, or on an institutional level. In fact, some
instruments can be implemented in the classroom, yet still yield
meaningful information on multiple levels.
Recommendation:
After reviewing the assessment options, costs, advantages, and
disadvantages, it is our opinion that we should pursue an assessment
plan with multiple measures. For ease of implementation, we
suggest an initial plan composed of several locally developed
one-shot items. These items may be assembled into an institutional
or student portfolio, if desired. We also suggest looking at
our placement testing and registration process to see if any
data can be used as an indication of entrance ability. We think
that an exit survey, or other indirect measure (such as an exit
interview) would be one way to measure attitudes and "post education"
outcomes. These three phases would not only provide us with
institutional assessment data, but would in some sense give
a longitudinal picture for individual students.
We also think that Classroom Based Assessment is ideally the
best for yielding meaningful data, for helping individual instructors
improve, and for its respect of teachers' abilities to assess
all phases of student learning. Thus we suggest using one-shot
items in the short term, to satisfy external reporting requirements
and to help us clarify our objectives, but moving toward a classroom
based approach as a sustainable, meaningful assessment system.
|
|
MSExcel format
