Assessment Almanac

Last updated January 09, 2019

Morningside College Assessment Almanac

This almanac provides resources and research related to assessment policies and practices at Morningside College. As a part of this almanac, you will find the following information:

Assessment Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Assessment Resources
Institutional Assessment Reports
Programmatic Assessment Plans and Reports
Graduate Program Assessment Forms
Undergraduate Program Assessment Forms

Assessment Spotlight: Annual Programmatic Assessment Reports

The Curriculum Policy and Assessment Committee (CPAC) has created a standing subcommittee to review and provide feedback on the programmatic assessment reports submitted annually by departments. This subcommittee reviews these assessment reports using six evaluation points. These points, evaluation scale, and the campus scores for reports submitted in 2017 and 2018 are provided below:

Evaluation Points and Scale (1-5)

2017 Campus Scores (1-5)

2018 Campus Scores (1-5)

A. Programmatic assessment report was submitted on time.

1: The program did not submit any assessment report
3: The program submitted an assessment report late, but prior to the beginning of the fall semester
5: The program submitted its programmatic assessment report on/before July 1

Mean = 3.3

Median = 3

Mean = 3.4

Median = 4.5

B. Program used the correct CPAC assessment form(s) for their assessment reports.

1: The program did not use the correct CPAC form
3: The program used portions of the form, but changed its format significantly
5: The program used the correct form without changing its format

Mean = 3.6

Median = 5

Mean = 5

Median = 5

C. Program specifically addressed the correct annual outcome(s) as indicated in their original programmatic assessment plans.

1: The program did not address any of the annual outcomes indicated in their assessment plan
3: The program addressed only a portion of their annual outcomes, or included assessment of outcomes not indicated in their original plan
5: The program assessed the outcomes as indicated in their annual assessment plan

Mean = 4.2

Median = 5

Mean = 4.2

Median = 5

D. Program's assessment report included a thoughtful reflection on how their assessment data can be used to "close the loop."

1: No reflection was provided on how to use assessment data
3: Program reflection leads to procedural changes only
5: Program reflection leads to significant pedagogical changes that will enhance student learning OR program reflection explains how current efforts are positively affecting student learning in a way that is replicable

Mean = 4.1

Median = 5

Mean = 4.1

Median = 5

E. Program provided a plan and timeline for how they can use assessment results to impart meaningful change in their pedagogies to enhance student learning.

1: No plan or timeline was offered for meaningful change
3: A plan, but no timeline was offered for meaningful change
5: An achievalbe plan and timeline for implementation of meaningful change was offered

Mean = 3.5

Median = 4

Mean = 3.9

Median = 4.5

F. Program provided substantive annual reports containing concrete details and examples.

1: No details or examples were provided regarding procedures, tools, or artifacts
3: The details and/or examples were unconnected or irrelevant
5 :The details and examples of assessment procedures, tools, and artifacts provided were concrete and pertinent to assessment and student learning goals

Mean = 4.4

Median = 5

Mean = 4.9

Median = 5

Report Compliance

90%

78%