Institutional Examples

Improving Student Learning with Assessment Results

Follow this model to "connect the dots" and tell the program's improvement story:

Describe the data and discussions that prompted action for change and identify the area of student learning
State the modifications that were made
Outline the process to monitor impact and interpret the impact on student learning

Examples of Using Results to Make Decisions

In these examples, programs outline an area of student learning that is not meeting expectations. The program discusses and implements strategies to improve student learning. This can be a simple modification to a course assignment or course material or it can be a larger modification to the curriculum or program requirements. The assessment report documented the faculty-led changes and subsequent impact.

Faculty noticed that students in ��ϲ��U 351 were not meeting the target set by the program. This was then causing issues in a 400 level course. As a result, the program and its instructors decided to implement additional online resources to supplement class lectures.

In the following year, students improved their project scores by 13% and their ability to integrate knowledge of scientific foundations was meeting the target set by the program.

Through the collection and analysis of the final lab report in the capstone course, faculty found that students were not meeting their expectations for demonstrating quantitative analysis skills. The undergraduate education committee investigated this issue further and devised a plan of action.

The faculty implemented two changes to the undergraduate curriculum: (1) the creation of a 1 credit laboratory class to be taken in conjunction with an existing 300 level course; (2) increasing the number of credits for ��ϲ��U 310 from 3 to 4 credits. The latter change will allow us to include a recitation section to the course in which students will be given greater opportunities to work on quantitative problems relevant to the topic of the class.

Our hope is that these two changes will better prepare and train our students in the quantitative and logic skills needed to analyze the data sets generated in the field studies class.

Over the past several years the undergraduate program has seen a trend in students receiving low pass rates on the Praxis I.

After some analysis and review by the program, the decision was made to purchase the NorthStar PRAXIS Core Prep package that is accessible on-line for free by all students. All teacher candidates are advised to use this resource. Advisors were instructed to share and show this resource to students during the spring advising meeting.

Since the addition of this resource and targeted advising, students' Reading scores on PRAXIS Core continue to be stronger than their scores on the Writing subtest.

Over the past three years the graduate program saw poor performance on the comprehensive exam. As a result, the Curriculum and Assessment Committee recommended a series of strategies to improve the research design rationales provided by students.

Over the past two years, faculty teaching the Introduction to Research course as well as Qualitative Methods 1 and Statistics in Research courses put additional emphasis on design and rationale for methodology. Specifically, the Introduction to Research course added a methods assignment and enhanced the rigor of the methods section in the final paper. The Qualitative Methods 1 and Statistics in Research courses both added a critique assignment to help students further develop these skills.

Contact

Institutional Effectiveness & Assessment

757-683-3322 office

assess@odu.edu