Dr. Marsha Watson
Director of Assessment
Dr. Kenny Royal
Assistant Director of Measurement & Analysis
Dr. Julie Johnson
Assessment Specialist
The LEARNING Initiative
Dual Track Implementation Strategy
Completion Dates
Not actively engaged in program level
assessment
Sept 2009
Program level student learning outcomes
revised and/or updated
Dec 2009
Assessment strategy in place
Jan-Mar 2010
Assessment strategy implemented
April 2010
Assessment results available for faculty
reflection and action
May 2010
First cycle completed and improvement
plans submitted
September 2010
At least one cycle completed
and improvement plans
submitted
First annual LEARNING Improvement awards announced
May 2011
Two cycles completed
August 2011
SACS Compliance Audit begins
September 2011
Actively engaged in program
level assessment
At least two cycles completed
Second annual LEARNING Improvement awards announced
 Academic units articulate and assess student learning
outcomes aligned with the institution’s academic
expectations
 Where are the institution’s other expectations – like
“tolerance,” “teamwork,” and “the ability to function in
an increasingly diverse world” taught and assessed?
 Is “taught” even the right word?
 Substitute “learned” for “taught” – and the question
becomes: Where are these other outcomes learned and
assessed?
 This shifts our perspective to:
 Student demonstration emphasis instead of topic-
covering
 Ability to do or apply supersedes knowing
 Shared responsibility for learning
 Site of learning becomes less specific; boundaries
become more porous
 Learning is not exclusively classroom-based
 Many important outcomes are:


Not learned in the classroom
The result of processes outside the classroom
 “Learning” is a process based on three interdependent
student experiences:
 Understanding academic content and processes
 Student development
 Identity formation
Developmental Paradigms
 Piaget: 4 stages of cognitive development
 Perry’s 9 stages of cognitive development
 http://www.uky.edu/TASC/ED/perry.php
 Kegan: 6 stages of psychological development
 Kohlberg: 6 stages of moral development
 Expands on Piaget’s two-stage theory of moral thought
 Responsibility for learning:
 Exists outside the classroom
 Doesn’t always take the same form
 Some entities on campus produce learning, some
facilitate learning, some support learning
 Thus, responsibility for assessing learning exists outside
the classroom as well
 Critical thinking
 Working with others
 Global competence
 Communication
 Adaptability
 Preparation for life-long learning
 Ethical behavior
 The cognitive and/or affective competencies we
intend students to be able to acquire with what they
have learned
 Achievement of outcomes indicates institutional and
departmental effectiveness
 Examples of co-curricular learning outcomes
Co-Curricular Learning Outcomes
 Must be:
 Intentional
 Carefully planned and designed
 Coordinated
 Carefully implemented
 Part of the structure of a student’s experience
 Assessed
Co-Curricular Assessment
 The “Effectiveness Model”
 Focus on student performance as a result of – or even
within – a planned, structured co-curricular activity
 Can be based on observation or objective measures
 Requires carefully designed and consistent measuring
practices
Formulate Statements of
Intended Learning
Outcomes
Discuss and Use
Assessment Results to
Improve Learning
Formative-Based
Revisions
Create Experiences
Leading
To Outcomes
Develop or Select
Assessment Measures
Activity #1 (15 minutes)
 The Evidence Inventory
 Working in groups, identify direct and indirect student
learning data you are already collecting
 Report back
Questions to Ponder as You Plan
 What action/experience are you assessing?
 What specific outcome is it meant to develop?
 How are you assessing that development?
 What specific information about that outcome’s
development do you want to know?
 What will you do with the information you gather?
Co-Curricular Assessment Example:
Group discussion of USC mini-case study
(10 minutes)
15 Minute Break!!
Design Backward
Intended
Learning
Outcomes of the
Activity
Intended
Intended
Learning
Learning
Outcomes of the Outcomes of the
Program
Department
Intended
Learning
Outcomes of the
Student Affairs
Division
Intended
Learning
Outcomes of the
Institution
Deliver Forward
Revised: Huba, M.E. and Freed, J.E. (2000). Learner-Centered Assessment on College Campuses:
Shifting the Focus from Teaching to Learning (p. 108). Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.
Activity # 2: Dr. Johnson
 Review: Handout #4 (Design Backward/Deliver





Forward)
Review University of Kentucky’s Mission/Vision
Review Values/Outcomes of Student Affairs
Review New Student and Parent Programs
Review K-Week
Discuss Learning Outcomes and K-Week Activity
Mapping
Planning for the Long Term
 Mapping and Coordinating
 If the learning outcome is important, a single exposure
isn’t enough
 Map activities/experiences to outcomes, from first year
to last year

Determine how first-year experiences are different from lastyear ones
 What difference is expected in student response?
 Plan to assure student’s development of outcomes from the
first year to the last
 Consider how co-curricular activities might be
coordinated with classroom instruction
Basic Mapping Template
Outcomes
Activity or
Learning
Experience #1
Activity or
Learning
Experience #2
Activity or
Learning
Experience #3
Activity or
Learning
Experience #4
Activity or
Learning
Experience #5
Outcome 1
I
R
E
R
E
R
Outcome 2
R
R
E
Outcome 3
I
Outcome 4
Outcome 5
E
I
R
E
R
= Outcome is introduced
= Outcome is reinforced
= Outcome is emphasized
R
Regular (Periodic) Assessment
 One-shot assessment produces haphazard results that
are usually insufficient for planning improvement
 Tie assessments to logical stages of development,
based on an outcomes map
 Be consistent in approach to assessing
 Options:


Standardized instruments
Self-generated tools
Questions to Ask about Evidence
 Is it relevant to the area’s stated mission and function?
 Does it measure what we want it to measure?
 Does it deal in some way with outcomes?
 Is the information derived useful?
 Can the information be used to improve either
function or learning?
Developing Measures of Effectiveness
 Intentional Planning
 Determine areas of responsibility: what office/function
might be a logical place to contribute to particular
learning outcomes?
 Plan the outcomes-based purpose of the activity
 Design non-passive activities

Ex: Watching a film plus discussion; International Days as
more than food, costumes, dance …
 Develop/design outcome-focused opportunities for
processing
Surveys and Questionaires
 Limitations:
 Self-reporting, unvalidated opinion
 Response rates
 “Opportunistic” data
 Skewed samples
Surveys and Questionaires
 Make them tools to (indirectly) assess learning
 Use learning outcomes as basis for at least some
questions
 Validate by cross-referencing outcomes with different
populations

employers, alumni, graduates, current students, etc.
 Emphasize the learning outcomes in design and analysis
Self-Generated Tools
 Observations
 Expert judgments
 Student self-reflection
 Peer assessments
 Group/team discussion
 Employer/supervisor judgments
University-Wide Assessment
 Ideally, should use the same rubrics or measures
 all who use them should have the same understanding
of its elements
 When using the same tools is not possible, it is
essential that there be a way to extract information
that is usable at the institutional level while still
serving the needs of the functional area
Activity #3
 Refer to Handout #8 (Activity #3 Worksheet)
 Working in groups, revise/refine two co-curricular
learning outcomes
 Identify appropriate:


student level (freshman, sophomore, etc)
stage of cognitive development
 Design a measurement(s) for each outcome
 Report back the large group
 Map the refined outcomes to learning
activities/experiences

Handout #9
One last thing …
Please complete the workshop evaluation
Thanks!