ERIC Identifier: ED391559 Publication Date: 1996-01-00
Author: Cress, Christine Source: ERIC Clearinghouse for
Community Colleges Los Angeles CA.
Assessment and Testing: Measuring Up to Expectations. ERIC
Historically, community colleges have not embraced research as a primary
mission and function. Many institutions utilize assessment measures to ensure
accurate student placement into courses and to self-monitor realization of
educational goals. However, with increasing pressure from external and internal
constituencies (accreditation bodies, legislators, taxpayers, parents) community
colleges have been called upon to "prove" their efficiency and effectiveness. In
essence, assessment has become synonymous with accountability (McMillan, 1994).
This digest will examine external pressures on and challenges to assessment
practices, frameworks and techniques for assessment, considerations in working
with diverse populations, and the importance of garnering institutional support
EXTERNAL PRESSURES AND CHALLENGES
Spurred by the Student
Right to Know Act, state coordinating and governing boards have reacted to
pressure from legislatures, business and the public to report on the outcomes of
full-time students. Inquiries include: how many students graduate from the
community college with an associate degree and in what time frame; how many
students transfer to four year institutions, how many graduates with associate
degrees or vocational certificates get jobs; and how much does it cost to
educate students? (McMillan, 1994).
Community college environments include transient student populations, wide
ranges of student ability, large numbers of adjunct faculty, and disparate
academic goals among students (Mittler & Bers, 1994a). Therefore,
cross-state or cross-national comparisons of graduation rate or semester to
semester retention may not take into account the unique mission an individual
college plays in its local community (Seybert, 1994). The fundamental purpose of
assessment should be improvement of campus instructional and support programs
thereby increasing the prospects of individual student success. Otherwise, "At
what point does a college spend more resources responding to exterior demands
than improving or even practicing its teaching and learning role?" (McMillan,
FRAMEWORKS FOR ASSESSMENT
Whether the assessment of
outcomes is internally or externally motivated, the importance of determining
who will assess the information and how it relates to student learning and
instruction is critical.
Mittler & Bers (1994a) suggest that institutions consider the following
questions in the who, what, when and how of assessment:
1) Who should be assessed? If a student attended more than one institution,
which college, even theoretically, could be expected to have most affected the
2) What should be assessed? Competency in basic skills such as writing and
math, or overarching achievements such as good citizenship and critical
3) What is the timeframe? During what time period are assessments rendered
moot because of time elapsed between the educational experience and the
4) How often can institutions reasonably ask students to participate in
5) Is collaboration between institutions possible in order to eliminate
TECHNIQUES AND METHODOLOGY
In selecting appropriate
assessment methods, investigators may want to refer to research literature and
examine models at other institutions. There are a wide range of options
including competency-based models, self-reports and third-party reports. The
relative advantages and disadvantages of each should be carefully evaluated.
Prus and Johnson (1994) suggest pilot-testing techniques in an educated trial
and error method before proceeding to full-scale implementation.
A challenge that institutions often face is identifying the type and amount
of assessment information that exists outside the college's office of
institutional assessment. By engaging in an "assessment audit" (a compilation of
what sorts of information about students is gathered at the institution)
duplicative or potentially complementary assessments existing in isolation can
be compiled and an understanding gained of how information is collected,
analyzed, stored, and used (Mittler & Bers, 1994b). This exercise may also
be valuable in establishing baselines of information about students. By knowing
the initial characteristics of students, institutions are better able to assess
The usefulness of techniques may vary depending on the issues being
evaluated. Qualitative forms of assessment should be incorporated as a way to
complement and sometimes challenge interpretations of quantitative data. Methods
include focus groups, in-depth interviews, participant observations and case
studies. Although the information can be difficult to generalize to populations,
the goal is to listen and watch for factors that influence outcomes. This
technique directly involves community college members in the process instead of
relying solely on the "truthfulness" of numbers. It allows individuals to share
in their own words how they perceive their environment and what areas they
consider effective or ineffective (Mittler & Bers, 1994b).
Oakton Community College (OCC) in Des Plaines, Illinois utilizes exit
interviews and alumni surveys as a form of assessment for programs and services.
They recently asked their students, "Where do you go to find help?" Like most
colleges they spend significant amounts of time and money producing catalogs,
brochures and other literature in the hope of answering students' questions and
informing them about what they need to know to succeed. Their students indicated
that they got college information not from the printed materials, but rather
from friends, faculty, counselors and librarians. Basically, they receive most
of their information from people. As a result, OCC placed a renewed emphasis on
communicating with students by having academic advisers roam registration lines,
increasing the availability of faculty advisers, and having identifiable staff
available to answer student questions during the start of each quarter (Mittler
& Bers, 1994b).
Community college student
populations are characterized by nontraditional attendance and matriculation
patterns, part-time and returning students, and those attending for upgrading of
technical or vocational skills. Students with learning disabilities and students
whose native language is not English are often highly represented (Seybert,
1994). Assessment activities need to take into consideration the needs of
culturally, ethnically, religiously, and linguistically diverse students. When
conducting campus wide assessments researchers must look for variations in
outcomes on the basis of students' different educational backgrounds as well as
differences in ethnic or cultural backgrounds. Not all students learn in the
same manner. Not all students enter college with the same levels of preparation.
Kerlin and Britz (1994) recommend that campuses seek information that informs
them about how students differ in areas such as retention, graduation rates, and
transfer to four year institutions.
North Seattle Community College conducted a campus-wide multicultural climate
study and systemwide evaluation on the performance of its diverse students. The
assessment not only focused on measurements of difference, but also on the
changing environments which influence outcomes. Data and anecdotal information
were presented to the faculty, resulting in changes made at the course,
department and institutional level. Specifically, the division of social
sciences reviewed all curricula and hired a new faculty member specializing in
multicultural issues. Training seminars and workshops on multiculturalism were
also offered to assist with the redesign and integration of curriculum.
Done effectively, multicultural assessments can heighten the awareness of and
sensitivity to cultural diversity. But because it elevates issues of race and
ethnicity, this type of assessment can also serve to heighten tensions. Before
engaging in assessments, researchers might ask themselves, what is the campus
wide commitment to diversity? Are there pockets of resistance? What resources is
the institution willing to devote to assessment of diverse students and what is
the willingness of its members to try new techniques or programs? (Kerlin &
GARNERING INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FOR ASSESSMENT
approaches, such as providing pizza or handing out baseball caps, have been used
to encourage students' participation in assessment activities. If students as
well as faculty and staff are to participate in and take assessment seriously,
extrinsic rewards are rarely enough. Assessment becomes an integral part of the
institution when this focus is clearly stated in the mission of the college and
emphasized as a part of insuring student success (Duvall, 1994). Barriers to
assessment processes often are faculty resistance, finding ways to motivate
students to put forth their best efforts, and lack of resources (Seybert, 1994).
Students, faculty and staff can take pride in their institution if they know
that excellence is planned and quality is measured (Duvall, 1994).
Assessment activities engaged in by institutions
have increased steadily to meet the needs and demands of constituencies. The
best student outcomes assessment processes and methodologies are of little value
unless the results are used to improve the curriculum and teaching process.
Rather than searching for a single indicator to demonstrate success,
institutions can foster climates that value the use of many different benchmarks
as evidence of institutional effectiveness, thereby, assuring the public and
themselves that students are being well-served by higher education.
This digest is drawn from "Assessment and
Testing: Myths and Realities," New Directions for Community Colleges, Number 88,
edited by Trudy H. Bers and Mary L. Mittler; published in Winter, 1994.
The cited articles include:
"Assessment from the State Perspective," by Virginia K. McMillan;
"Assessment from a National Perspective: Where are We, Really?" by Jeffrey A.
"Assessment and Transfer: Unexamined Complexities," by Mary L. Mittler and
Trudy H. Bers (a);
"Obtaining Student Cooperation for Assessment," by Betty Duvall;
"Assessment and Diversity: Outcome and Climate Measurements," by Scott P.
Kerlin and Patricia B. Britz;
"Qualitative Assessment: An Institutional Reality Check," by Mary L. Mittler
and Trudy H. Bers (b);
"A Critical Review of Student Assessment Options," by Joseph Prus and Reid
Please note that this site is privately owned and is in no way related
to any Federal agency or ERIC unit. Further, this site is using a
privately owned and located server. This is NOT a government sponsored
or government sanctioned site. ERIC is a Service Mark of the U.S. Government.
This site exists to provide the text of the public domain ERIC Documents
previously produced by ERIC. No new content will ever appear here
that would in any way challenge the ERIC Service Mark of the U.S. Government.