Assessment HappensJanuary 7th, 2014Pete Turner & Erik HuntsingerSAAC Co-chairs

Agenda

General Education Abilities•Composition/Writing Results & Discussion

•Steps taken to improve students’ writing•Communication Update•Gen Ed Cycle Adjustment•Information Literacy Recruitment

About Assessment: Formative Assessment•Background•Obtrusive vs. Unobtrusive

Comprehensive Assessment Tracking System (CATS!)•CATS 2.0: Recent changes•CATS of the Year•CATS of the Month Sharing Time•CATS Workshop•Lunch

Thank you SAAC Members!

Writing-Composition Spring 2013

•New writing-across-the curriculum rubric developed by composition and SAAC faculty •On-Line Writing Center (OLC) was used to assess and report results•Assessors went through inter-rater reliability training •10 classes (AJS123, ECN211, ECN212, EDU222, ENG081, ENG091, ENG101, ENH254, MAT217, SOC212), 15 sections, 8 instructors, and 214 unique students involved with a total of 235 documents submitted•Results compared overall results of new freshman (0-7 cumulative earned hours at beginning of term) to sophomore students (30+ cumulative earned hours at beginning of term)

Writing-Composition Results

Campus-wide Focus on Editing

What We Have Done So Far West Valley Think Tank

Presentation to a feeder high school

Leadership Council Email blast to EMCC faculty and adjunct faculty Division Meetings Writing Center Staff

Results From Writing Center Meeting (Rodica, Doug, Kelly, Erik, Pete)

Strongly suggested to involve your students (especially those with writing issues) to WC:First writing assignment, require them to turn in a WC corrected draft with their final copyExtra creditSchedule WC person to come to classMandate identified students to go to WCIf doing in-class writing (research, assignments, etc.), use space right outside WC

Next Steps Requesting a campus wide focus on writing mechanics and

citations At your tables, come up with 1-2 ideas that could be

implemented across the curriculum to help support our student’s writing mechanics and/or citation skills

Information Literacy (Spring 2014) has a citation component

Communication Assessment UpdatePreliminary data 12 different instructors 12 different prefixes 19 different courses 29 different sections 526 (duplicated) students

Results will be shared when available and during Assessment Happens Fall 2013

Adjustments to Assessment Cycle

Rationale for Adjustments Pair Social, Civic, & Global Responsibility with Writing-

Composition 7 abilities in a 3 year (6 semester) cycle All the SCGR submission from previous cycle were compositions Next Round: Spring 2015

SAAC recommends rebranding of two gen ed abilities Scientific Inquiry Critical Inquiry Numeracy Quantitative Reasoning Purpose is to create broader cross-curricular appeal Need support from Science and MPE divisions, respectively

Information Literacy Assessment If you assign paper or project

requiring research and citations

Grade assignments as you normally would

Just need to submit your students’ work (electronically or hard copy) to Terry Meyer

Look for sign-up link coming soon!

We need you!

Information Literacy Rubric

About Formative Assessment “The research reported here shows conclusively that . . .

assessment does improve learning.” “The gains in achievement appear to be quite

considerable . . . among the largest ever reported for educational interventions” (Black & William, 1998)

Formative Assessment – A Brain Tickler! Do you know the difference between obtrusive and

unobtrusive formative assessment?

Obtrusive vs. Unobtrusive

Obtrusive Assessment

Purposeful interruption of flow of instruction Paper-and-pencil test or quiz Demonstration (teacher or student) Oral report (student) Constructed conversation Presentation (teacher or student) Use of mini-whiteboards Note-taking interruption with task (e.g. Cornell Notes) In-class item analysis Use of clickers in Ppt presentations

Unobtrusive AssessmentDoes not interrupt flow of instruction Teacher observation Use of proximity Questioning with random selection Observation of individual student or student interactions in

groups, with feedback Importance of teacher circulation

Formative Assessment Both obtrusive and unobtrusive very powerful (Marzano, et.

al., 2013) The basis for the Comprehensive Assessment Tracking

System!

Why Assess?

Marzano, R.M. (2006)

CATSCOMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT TRACKING SYSTEM

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES1. Faculty are more likely to change their teaching practices and strategies through the influence of their peers than through administrative dictum or externally imposed professional development (Huber, 2012; Reeves, 2008; Turner, 2013).

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES2. Faculty (and leaders) who care about student learning have a persistent discomfort with the status quo (DuFour & DuFour, 2006; O’Banion, 2007; Wilson, 2010).

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES3. Frequent formative assessment is one of the most viable, research-backed techniques to optimize student learning (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Black & William, 2008; Marzano, 2006)

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES4. The Action Research Cycle, employed both formally and informally, is the most effective vehicle for implementing, assessing, and reforming instructional techniques to maximize student learning (Mertler, 2009; Mills, 2007; Reeves, 2008; Stringer, 2007;

Turner, 2003) .

What CATS is About It’s about implementing a formative assessment Seeing if it works Sharing it

Recent Updates to CATS Newly edited forms return to the top of the homepage CATS of the Month Criteria Posted SAAC Dashboard CATS of the Year (All Faculty Vote - May 2014)

CATS of the Month Sharing August – Pete Turner and Nikol Price September – Cecelia Rosales October – Christina Van Puymbroeck November – Cheri Hebert

Lunch Ticket READ a CATS form COMMENT on a CATS form RATE a CATS form

Or… start a new CATS form!

References Angelo, T.A., and Cross, P.K. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for

college teachers (2nd. Ed.). Black, P., and William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in

Education, 5(1), 7-75. DuFour, R. & DuFour, R. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning

communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Huber, M.T. (2008). The promise of faculty inquiry for teaching and learning basic skills. A

Report from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Strengthening Pre-Collegiate Education in Community Colleges. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED503130.pdf .

Marzano, R.M. (2006) Classroom assessment and grading that work. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R.J., Yanoski, D.C., Hoegh, J. K., Simms, J. A. (2013). Using Common Core Standards to enhance instruction and assessment. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research Laboratories.

Mertler, C. (2009). Action research: Teachers as researchers in the classroom (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, G.E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

References O'Banion, T. (2007). Leadership for learning. Community College Journal, 78(2), 45-47.

Retrieved from Research Library. (Document ID: 1383351301). Reeves, D. B. (2008). Reframing teacher leadership to improve your school.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Turner, P. (2013). Informal faculty leadership that transforms: Evidences and practices

for the Learning College. Dissertation, Northcentral University. UMI # 3571494 Turner, R. (2003). A pragmatic approach to educating: Connecting problem-based

learning to Service Learning. Dissertation, Capella University. UMI # 3068397 Wilson, C. (August 23, 2010). From a telephone interview conducted by Peter Turner,

Doctoral candidate, Northcentral University; and Learning College Project Director at the League for Innovation in the Community College.