BSC Assessment Plan

Executive Summary

BSC’s original 5 year assessment plan was approved in spring, 1990.  It set the direction for assessment in general education, composition and computation skills, major programs and student social/personal growth.  An Assessment Steering Committee provided oversight to sub-committees working in each of these areas.  A second 5-year plan, adopted in 1994, outlined pathways to institutionalizing assessment and using results for continuous improvement in teaching and learning. The current plan rests on the foundation of prior work.

The current assessment plan exhibits the six characteristics of an assessment program recommended by Middle States Association:

• A foundation in the Institution’s Mission, Goals and Objectives
  
  BSC is committed to the intellectual, personal and professional growth of its students, faculty and staff. Promoting success in teaching and learning is an institutional priority.  Growth and success are attained in basic competencies, general education and major programs as well as outside the classroom in co-curricular activities.  The assessment plan specifies methods of assessing student growth and achievement in 2 general competency areas, 10 outcome areas in general education and in major programs.  It also provides a framework for assessing quality in non-instructional areas.

• The support and collaboration of faculty and administration
  
  Assessment overall has been and continues to be faculty/staff driven.  Specific plans are developed by the relevant faculty/staff in each area.  There is a standing Assessment Advisory Board made up of faculty/staff representatives from across the campus.  The Sr. Advisor to the Provost for Assessment is a faculty member who participates in regular meetings with administrators from all areas of the college.

• A systematic and thorough use of quantitative and qualitative measures
  
  Assessment principles mandate triangulation or the use of multiple measures for assessing achievement.  This principle recognizes the complexity of the concepts, activities, and learning that is measured. It also promotes both direct and indirect assessment of activities and learning outcomes. Plans submitted from instructional and non-instructional areas include direct assessment measures, although they may be either quantitative or qualitative depending on which is deemed appropriate by the faculty/staff developing the plan.

• Assessment and evaluative approaches lead to improvement
  
  Assessment plans in all areas include a requirement to specify the process by which information will be considered and result in improvement.

• Realistic goals and a timetable, supported by appropriate investment
  
  The assessment plan directs consistent and repeated assessment activities. The college has made a significant investment in assessing its performance on a continuous basis.
  A faculty member is the Sr. Advisor to the Provost for Assessment, a full time position.  She directs the office of Academic Information and Assessment which includes a full time staff assistant.  Several national and local surveys are purchased each year.  Support for attendance at meetings has been made available.

• An evaluation of the assessment program
  
  During and at the end of each five-year plan a review is conducted by the Assessment Advisory Board. The Board will evaluate the assessment program in light of goals/objectives accomplished and improvements made.

The overall purpose of assessment is two-fold:

1. Improvement/effectiveness: Through benchmarking, cohort and longitudinal analyses assessment results provide useful information for improving programs, services and the institution as a whole.

2. Accountability/accreditation: Through surveys, assessment of student satisfaction and performance all stakeholders should be aware of how well the institution is meeting it’s goals and objectives and mission overall. The assessment website and newsletter are available to all campus constituents. 

Introduction:  History of Assessment at BSC

Assessment at BSC grew out of a request by then SUNY Provost Joseph Burke in June 1989.  For the next few years, teams of faculty/staff and administrators were sent to various assessment conferences. An assessment committee structure was built. On April 20, 1990 the College Senate, BSC’s governance body reviewed and accepted the first five-year assessment plan.  Administrative responsibility for assessment resided in the Office of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs/Dean of Undergraduate Studies.

Originally assessment was based upon a series of principles and guidelines.  These principles set the parameters within which assessment was to proceed at BSC:   

• The major goal of outcome assessment at BSC is the improvement of the undergraduate experience of our students.  Assessment at BSC refers to a process of understanding the phenomena and outcomes of student learning, as well as clarifying goals and enhancing student and program performance.

• The assessment plan will seek to integrate and incorporate existing efforts underway within the faculties and to utilize existing procedures and processes.

• Assessment efforts at all levels should reflect the mission and goals as well as the diversity of BSC

• The results of the assessment activities herein proposed and described will not be used to make comparisons between individual students, faculty or academic departments.

• Data derived from the assessment activities herein proposed and described will not be used to evaluate individual courses, faculty or students.

• Assessment activities herein proposed and described will be used for program assessment only and not be used to establish “gateway” steps for students.

• Assessment activities at BSC should be based on multiple approaches and multiple indices.

First Five-year Plan (1989 – 1994)

Tasks, responsibilities and potential implementation guidelines were outlined in

Four areas: General education, major programs, computation and composition and social/personal growth. The primary focus was the process of setting goals and objectives in these four areas. A committee/sub-committee structure was set up that included over 100 faculty/staff/administrators over the five-year period.  Major program assessment was helped along by a FIPSE grant, which enabled 6 “pioneering” departments to begin addressing means by which assessment would take place.

Accomplishments included:

1. The strategic plan for the College contained a list of expectations of BSC graduates taken from various assessment efforts and consolidated into one statement

2. Three methods of assessing outcomes in general education were conducted sporadically. These included analysis of course taking patterns, a series of focus groups, and administration of a national critical thinking test.  These efforts resulted in the College Senate modifying   the general education requirements by eliminating a category of 18 hours of general education electives.

3. BSC earned national recognition through its approach to fostering assessment in the academic major through several papers and presentations at national and regional assessment meetings.

4. All departments were required to include assessment procedures in the self-study portion of the periodic 5 year program review process.

5. A set of guidelines and a manual on assessment in the major were developed.  The manual set out an annual reporting mechanism.

6. Review of entering student test results in composition resulted in a decision to redesign the delivery system of English 099 and to provide a non-credit mathematics component.

7. Innovative methodology to assess social and personal growth was piloted and repeated for 2 years.

Second Five-year Plan (1994-1999)

The second five-year plan emphasized the college’s need to clarify the role of assessment within the campus culture and more specifically, the campus planning and decision-making structure.  It became clear that in order for assessment activities to continue, remain viable and be taken seriously by the many individuals charged to conduct them, decisions on campus must be tied to assessment results.

A number of agendas were set out to advance assessment activities and in particular to ensure the utilization of assessment results.  The agendas included:

• Clarification of the role of assessment on campus: While the campus strategic plan called for data to guide decisions it did not specify how outcome assessment data would be incorporated in the overall planning process.
  
  Goal:  Systematically provide assessment data as a basis for planning.

• Institutionalization of the process of data collection and assessment activities: Outcomes assessment needed to be routinized.  As such the Assessment Steering Committee should adopt an oversight function rather than an activities function.  It should promote assessment activities, serve as a resource to the campus community and distribute results to the decision-makers. In addition, the overall leadership for assessment should reside with a full-time director. This position should include administration of testing, test construction, guidance to academic departments, research on student data, incorporation of assessment-related questions to campus-based initiatives and communication of assessment results to the campus community.
  
  Goal:  Establish an Assessment Office with a full-time director.

• Promotion of the proactive use of assessment results in the campus decision-making process: In order for assessment activities to continue to remain viable and be taken seriously, decisions on campus must continue to be tied to assessment results. Communication of assessment results is vital to this undertaking.
  
  Goal:  Establish vehicles for communicating assessment results to the campus community. Establish processes for using results in decision-making and planning.

Accomplishments included:

1. The Assessment Advisory Board assumed an oversight role.  A faculty member was assigned full-time to directing the assessment efforts.

2. An Assessment web site and newsletter, Assessment Matters, were developed to disseminate data to the campus community.

3. Assessment activities were routinized:  Entering students and recent alumni are surveyed every year.  Current students are surveyed every 3 years.  Departments annually report their assessment activities and plans.  Assessment briefs are generated annually on retention and graduate rates benchmarked with other schools.

4. The Sr. Advisor to the Provost for Assessment is a member of the Academic Affairs Council and the Steering Committee for Strategic Planning.

Third Five-year Plan 2002-2007

Assessment does not occur in a vacuum.  The development of a third five-year plan was delayed somewhat due to changing requirements from external stakeholders, SUNY/SUNY Trustees and changes occurring in the administration at BSC.

The third five-year plan incorporates assessment across the campus.  Academic programs in general education and major areas will be assessed on a cyclical basis.  A full cycle of assessment in general education will occur every 3 years and a full cycle of assessment in major programs will occur every 5 years corresponding with either external accreditation or BSC program review schedules.

In addition to academic programs, all non-instructional departments will also engage in assessment.  Every department will develop an assessment plan that sets out goals/objectives, specific activities that meet the goals/objectives, methodology for collecting information/data, criteria against which to measure success in meeting goals/objectives and a process for improvement based upon the results.