As explained in the Mid-project Update, November 2007, the QTA Committee developed and distributed a Faculty Survey of Assessment Mechanisms at the beginning of the Fall 2007 semester. The aggregated results of that survey follow.
| Regularly | Occasionally | Rarely/Never | Total Responses | Non-responses | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment Mechanisms | No. | % | No. | % | No. | % | No. | % | No. | % |
| 01. Tests developed by myself | 166 | 90.2% | 17 | 9.2% | 1 | 0.5% | 184 | 100.0% | 0 | 0.0% |
| 02. Tests developed by the department/program | 24 | 13.0% | 46 | 25.0% | 112 | 60/9% | 182 | 98.9% | 2 | 1.1% |
| 03. Textbook exams that come from a test bank or textbook | 27 | 14.7% | 60 | 32.6% | 94 | 51.1% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 04. Portfolios | 26 | 13.0% | 60 | 32.6% | 98 | 53.3% | 182 | 98.9% | 2 | 1.1% |
| 05. Final projects/exams | 171 | 92.9% | 11 | 6.0% | 1 | 0.5% | 183 | 99.5% | 1 | 0.5% |
| 06. Capstone projects | 37 | 20.1% | 25 | 13.6% | 117 | 63.6% | 179 | 97.3% | 5 | 2.7% |
| 07. Student focus groups | 7 | 3.8% | 37 | 20.1% | 135 | 73.4% | 179 | 97.3% | 5 | 2.7% |
| 08. Student surveys | 43 | 23.4% | 88 | 47.8% | 50 | 27.2% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 09. Employer feedback | 54 | 29.3% | 86 | 46.7% | 42 | 22.8% | 182 | 98.9% | 2 | 1.1% |
| 10. Quizzes | 147 | 79.9% | 29 | 15.8% | 8 | 4.3% | 184 | 100.0% | 0 | 0.0% |
| 11. Reflective writing/journal writing | 49 | 26.6% | 65 | 35.3% | 70 | 38.0% | 184 | 100.0% | 0 | 0.0% |
| 12. Notebook of coursework | 53 | 28.8% | 49 | 26.6% | 81 | 44.0% | 183 | 99.5% | 1 | 0.5% |
| 13. Research paper(s) | 61 | 33.2% | 79 | 42.9% | 43 | 23.4% | 183 | 99.5% | 1 | 0.5% |
| 14. Non-research paper(s) (position statement, e.g.) | 32 | 17.4% | 57 | 31.0% | 90 | 48.9% | 179 | 97.3% | 5 | 2.7% |
| 15. Take home test | 27 | 14.7% | 72 | 39.1% | 84 | 45.7% | 183 | 99.5% | 1 | 0.5% |
| 16. Graded homework (in addition t%ther than reading a text) | 111 | 60.3% | 60 | 32.6% | 12 | 6.5% | 183 | 99.5% | 1 | 0.5% |
| 17. Standardized tests (e.g. prepared from outside, competency tests, program-specific tests, MS cert.) | 33 | 17.9% | 33 | 17.9% | 115 | 62.5% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 18. Internship/co-op/practicum - Evaluation sheets from College | 43 | 23.4% | 23 | 12.5% | 112 | 60.9% | 178 | 96.7% | 6 | 3.3% |
| 18. Internship/co-op/practicum - Other evaluation | 35 | 19.0% | 19 | 10.3% | 116 | 63.0% | 170 | 92.4% | 14 | 7.6% |
| 19. Personal interview | 26 | 14.1% | 67 | 36.4% | 87 | 47.3% | 180 | 97.8% | 4 | 2.2% |
| 20. Lab evaluations | 126 | 68.5% | 25 | 13.6% | 30 | 16.3% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 21. Group projects | 93 | 50.5% | 64 | 34.8% | 25 | 13.6% | 182 | 98.9% | 2 | 1.1 |
| 22. Presentations (oral, visual) | 85 | 46.2% | 72 | 39.1% | 27 | 14.7% | 184 | 100.0% | 0 | 0.0% |
| 23. Reviews from PCT entity (other than supervisor) | 7 | 3.8% | 46 | 25.0% | 128 | 69.6% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 24. Reviews from non-PCT entity | 16 | 8.7% | 35 | 19.0% | 129 | 70.1% | 180 | 97.8% | 4 | 2.2% |
| 25. Rubrics | 60 | 32.6% | 54 | 29.3% | 67 | 36.4% | 181 | 98.4% | 3 | 1.6% |
| 26. Other | 12 | 6.5% | 11 | 6.0% | 52 | 28.3% | 75 | 40.8% | 109 | 59.2% |
The survey included several open-ended questions in an effort to gain qualitative feedback on the assessment processes currently in use for program review, accreditation, and certification. The answers to these questions were analyzed to determine common themes represented by the respondents. The questions and the four common themes are presented below:
Open-ended Questions
- What are any recommendations you might have for the [program review, accreditation, and certification] process?
- How could the College’s process be improved?
- What resources would be helpful to you for program review/accreditation/certification/endorsement?
Response Themes
- Faculty recommend that more assistance be provided for the assessment processes in place at Penn College. They noted the need for help in the form of a facilitator, leader, or coordinator.
- Faculty recommend that the assessment processes involve more stakeholders.
- Faculty recommend that the processes become streamlined and be made perpetual.
- Faculty recommend that more support be provided for the assessment process in the form of staffing (as noted above), data provision, and stipends or release time to do assessment.