Meta-Assessment: Assessing the Learning Outcomes Assessment Program

Schoepp, Kevin; Benson, Scott R.

doi:10.1007/s10755-015-9347-2

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This IQA process embedded a meta-assessment that enabled faculty to evaluate their own practice (Schoepp & Benson, 2016;Pham, 2020). After attending meetings to discuss assessment results within their competency, faculty were encouraged to run the report, watch a video on the assessment website on the strategies of interpreting assessment data, and then fill in the GE assessment self-reflection sheet (Appendix A).…”

Section: The Alignment Of Iqa Process With Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal quality assurance of institutional learning outcomes: United States case study and implications for Vietnam higher education

Pham¹,

Nguyen²

2021

VJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Higher education institutions (HEIs) are under pressure to provide evidence of student success. In addition to traditional performance indicators such as GPA, grades, and rates of retention, graduation and employment, stakeholders also required institutions to provide evidence of institutional learning outcomes (ILOs). ILOs encompass the knowledge and skills that all students regardless of disciplines from a specific university are expected to demonstrate upon their graduation. This case study examines a complete internal quality assurance (IQA) cycle from a U.S. comprehensive university, including the adaptation of national authentic assessment measures, the use of technology in data analysis, the best practices to communicate assessment results to multiple internal stakeholders to facilitate leadership decision-making, the challenges encountered, and the improvement plans to sustain the procedure. Researchers also make recommendations to Vietnam HEIs that want to adopt IQA of ILOs for both quality improvement and accountability purposes.

show abstract

Section: The Alignment Of Iqa Process With Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal quality assurance of institutional learning outcomes: United States case study and implications for Vietnam higher education

Pham¹,

Nguyen²

2021

VJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indirect measures normally require students to reflect on how well they perform. In the context of meta-assessment, direct measures refer to the institutions' performance in the quality process such as participation rate and assessment quality (Fulcher and Bashkov, 2012) and assessment surveys serve as indirect assessments (Cardoso et al, 2019;Schoepp and Tezcan-unal, 2017;Martin, 2017 andRodgers et al, 2013).…”

Section: Meta-assessment Of Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All three measures, participation rate, assessment quality and impact of assessment, serve as direct measures, as they show the performance of institutions' efforts toward assessment of SLOs. Meanwhile, Videira and Amaral (2019), Martin (2017), Schoepp and Tezcan-unal (2017), Robinson et al (2016) and Rodgers et al (2013) mostly used surveys to ask for faculty perceptions of the overall quality process. The survey items typically reflected variations in the quality processes in each case such as awareness of assessment materials and activities, effectiveness of the assessment committee and drivers of internal quality assurance (Martin, Measures of a quality process 2017).…”

Section: Meta-assessment Of Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The survey items typically reflected variations in the quality processes in each case such as awareness of assessment materials and activities, effectiveness of the assessment committee and drivers of internal quality assurance (Martin, Measures of a quality process 2017). The surveys by Schoepp and Tezcan-unal (2017) and Rodgers et al (2013) used open and closed items, and included interviews with program coordinators who engaged directly in the assessment process.…”

Section: Meta-assessment Of Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiple meta-assessment measures of a quality process: toward institutional effectiveness

Pham

2020

QAE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to share quality process experience from a US comprehensive university to use both direct (participation rate and assessment quality) and indirect assessment measures (assessment survey) to evaluate the quality process. Design/methodology/approach A mixed method design was used to evaluate the quality process. The qualitative design used thematic analysis to find the common themes from the assessment survey. The quantitative design included reliability and internal consistency for the survey and inter-rater reliability for the peer review. Findings Findings indicated that participation rate and assessment quality improved over the years. Faculty provided positive feedback about assessment website, the peer review process and feedback but negative perspectives on the assessment management software and heavy workload on assessment activities. The researcher shared the actions made based on three-year assessment results, especially how leaders have used it to align with planning and budgeting to close the institutional effectiveness loop. Research limitations/implications This research had two limitations. The inter-rater reliability of the peer review was not high and the number of peer review reports in two years were so different, so the results could not be checked for statistical significance. Practical implications The meta-assessment results could have important implications for other universities to improve the quality process. Originality/value There have been limited studies on using both direct and indirect assessment measures to evaluate the quality process. This study uses multiple measures to provide accurate results for administrators’ decision-making in resource allocation.

show abstract

“…In recent years, post-secondary faculties across a variety of disciplines have spent considerable effort building systems to collect assessment data with the goal of helping improve the student experience [1]. However, using this data to guide program improvement decisions at any level has been inhibited by a lack of familiarity among instructors, administrators and support staff to extract actionable information effectively [2], [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%