How to measure what students have learned by the time they graduate is something colleges and universities have wrestled with for some time.
This complex issue was the topic of a Provost’s Forum on the Campus Learning Environment. The aim of this forum and those in the coming year is to promote campus discussion on topics that are of key interest to the University and its long-term goals.
“What do we want our students to learn? How do we know what they learned? How do we know they learned it here?” asked Teresa Sullivan, provost and vice president for academic affairs, during the Feb. 4 event at the Michigan League Ballroom. “We need to find more ways to make information on learning available, and to include learning assessment in our evaluations. This is only the beginning of an important campus discussion.”
The forum, which involved about 80 faculty leaders from across campus, included several talks on the value of and approaches to assessment, panel presentations, and moderated group discussion.
The goal of the event was to begin a campus discussion about setting learning goals and how to measure outcomes in a university with a broad array of programs and educational cultures where learning occurs in many different settings using various methods, said Ben van der Pluijm, professor of geology and environment, LSA, who serves as senior counselor to the provost for University accreditation.
Tracking learning outcomes has become an important part of the national debate on accreditation in higher education. It also offers direct value for students, faculty and academic programs.
“Why is assessment important?” asked Eric Dey, associate professor, Center for the Study of Higher Education and Postsecondary Education, School of Education. “It’s the best way to explain and defend educational programs to our students, to ourselves and to society.”
He then offered a first attempt at a set of broad learning goals, based on national and University discussion.
“The challenge is that we want students to do things, not just know them,” said Deborah Ball, professor and dean, School of Education.
“A national test score won’t tell you why a student is strong or weak,” said Trudy Banta, professor of higher education and senior advisor to the chancellor for academic planning and evaluation at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. “You need other measures,” such as portfolios, questionnaires and interviews.
Some existing systems of accountability, including standardized test scores, have fallen short, Banta said. Most do not offer information on improvement and there are so many variables it proves difficult to get an accurate reading of the meaning of those scores, she said.
Based on discussions at the forum and elsewhere, other approaches hold more value for the University, such as electronic portfolios, projects, and capstone courses. Portfolios, for example, also allow for the use of multimedia elements that show the range and diversity of a student’s learning.
Over the years, Joseph Fantone, professor and associate dean, Medical School, said he has seen the demand shift from knowledge-based to performance-based assessments. “It also takes a great deal of effort to give an assessment that provides feedback on how a program is performing,” he said.
Accountability and assessments are components of a reflective process that is increasingly important in today’s university environment, said John King, vice provost for academic information, Office of the Provost, and professor of information, School of Information. “I think we will see a lot more craftwork in discussions between students and faculty regarding coursework,” King said.
“Through campus discussion we hope to increase the focus on learning goals in our teaching,” van der Pluijm said.
