journal of public affairs education - NASPAA *The Global Standard ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

How Do We Know What They Know?Evaluating Student-Learning Outcomes in an MPA Programassessment system. This involvement facilitates implementation, and enhancesthe positive benefits of assessing student-learning outcomes. Some of thesepositive benefits include faculty development, curricular improvement,improved teaching, and improved learning (Angelo & Cross, 1993). If facultymembers are committed to assessment, students are more likely to viewassessment as something that enhances accountability and potentially improvesthe quality of teaching in the classroom (Brown, Hirschfeld, & Gerrit, 2008).Unfortunately, the draw of assessment is countered by several factors that adddifficulty to the implementation of a comprehensive assessment system. Weiss, etal. (2002) point out that resistance to assessment often results from the systemnot being marketed correctly to faculty. The development and implementation ofcomprehensive assessment systems is resource-intensive for administration andfaculty alike, and if the benefits are not viewed as exceeding the costs, resistancewill be profound. Banta, Lund, Black, and Oblander (1996) recognize that,because assessment is often contrary to faculty reward structures, it can increaseresistance. If faculty members are faced with a choice of doing research orassessment, the reward structure in most academic environments is certainlyskewed toward the former. Academic tradition also values the individuality ofteaching, thus making it difficult to apply the standardization that is often ahallmark of assessment systems. A multi-dimensional assessment system thatincludes open participation by multiple assessors usually involves scrutiny byother faculty, which may make some of them unlikely to participate.Despite these sources of resistance, the utility of a comprehensive assessmentsystem has led most programs to develop assessment measures. This is true forthe MPA program at CSULB, and this paper explores the development of theassessment system and some preliminary data that have emerged in the earlyperiod of implementation.LAYERED VS. HOLISTIC ASSESSMENTThe assessment system at CSULB was originally envisioned as a layeredassessment approach that afforded assessment opportunities at several points in astudent’s academic career. However, it was soon apparent that the characterizationof the assessment system as “layered” was incomplete at best. A layered assessmentapproach denotes a vertical design, where one participant would have multipleopportunities to assess a student’s development. It is essential to include multipleparticipants in the assessment process and to afford these participants theopportunity to assess student progress at multiple points in a student’s career.Therefore, a more accurate characterization of the new assessment system isthat it is holistic rather than layered. A holistic approach is multi-dimensional aswell as longitudinal. It involves multiple participants who engage in assessmentat multiple points of time during a student’s academic career. These attributescharacterize CSULB’s system.Journal of Public Affairs Education 271
How Do We Know What They Know?Evaluating Student-Learning Outcomes in an MPA ProgramIn this view of assessment, there are multiple stakeholders who are activelyengaged in student assessment, from a student’s entry into the program ofstudy until graduation. In the fall semester of 2007, the MPA program atCSULB instituted a holistic assessment system that gives multiple stakeholdersnumerous opportunities for student-learning outcome assessment. Thesestakeholders may include the students, full-time faculty, part-time faculty,administration, advisory board members, and members of the community.These multiple stakeholders need multiple opportunities to become engaged inthe assessment process. For the assessment system at CSULB, assessment beginsupon entry into the program.ENTRY-LEVEL ASSESSMENTThe first point of assessment for most students is, naturally, an admissionfile. As part of admission, prospective students must submit an essay andother items intended to provide insight into their career-based goals, andobjectives for the MPA program. Historically, it also has been used to evaluatestudent writing competencies. This process has occurred on an individualbasis, with inter-student comparisons made only on an anecdotal level. Thisassessment was done solely by the admissions committee. Once admitted tothe MPA program, specific student skills were not assessed in a standardizedfashion, thus making it difficult to determine the skill levels of students uponentry into the program.In the fall semester of 2007, the MPA program initiated the use of InitialSkills Self-Assessments. An example of this assessment instrument can befound in Appendix A. The purpose of this instrument is to enable students toevaluate their own skills in several important skill areas. This is done throughan ordinal ranking and a narrative analysis. Students complete this assessmentin their PPA 500 Foundations of Public Administration (PPA 500) course,and it is evaluated at the course level by the instructor of record. Each PPA500 instructor also supplies a copy to the departmental assessment director,who compiles a database of the ordinal rankings. These Initial Skills Self-Assessments are then coupled with a final assessment that students completeat the end of the PPA 697 Directed Research (PPA 697) course program, andare submitted as part of the Student Learning Portfolio. The addition of theseInitial Skills Self-Assessments has enabled students, course instructors, thedepartmental assessment director, and other faculty to review the selfperceivedstrengths and weaknesses of students in each of the important skillareas for the program. The data generated by the Initial Skills Self-Assessment,completed by PPA 500 students enrolled during the fall 2007 semester, appearin Tables 1 and 2. (See Tables 1 and 2.)272 Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 1 and 2: Summer 2009 Volume 15, No. 3JPAEJOU
Page 5 and 6: the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Page 7 and 8: Public Values As aCore Element of N
Page 9 and 10: Public Values as a Core Element of
Page 15: How Do We Know What They Know?Evalu
Page 19 and 20: How Do We Know What They Know?Evalu
Page 33 and 34: Enhancing Professional Socializatio
Page 61 and 62: Staying Connected: MPA StudentPerce
Page 63 and 64: Staying Connected: MPA Student Perc
Page 65 and 66: Staying Connected: MPA Student Perc
Page 67 and 68:
Staying Connected: MPA Student Perc
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Teaching Public Administration As a
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Badgers & Hoosiers:An Interstate Co
Page 93 and 94:
Badgers & Hoosiers: An Interstate C
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Operation PSA: The Action Learningo
Page 105 and 106:
Operation PSA: The Action Learning
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Introduction of Government ProcessM
Page 127 and 128:
Introduction of Government Process
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
show all

journal of public affairs education - NASPAA *The Global Standard ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?