Assessment Plan – Year 0 Report

College:  Education, Health, & Human Development
Department: Education
Submitted by: Sarah Pennington		  

Year 0 Assessment Plan Report is due September 15th .

 

Indicate all majors, minors, certificates and/or options that are included in this new assessment Plan

Majors/Minors/Certificate Options
Ph.D. Adult & Higher Education; Curriculum & Instruction; Educational Leadership
   

Part 1: Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)

PLOs should be written as specific, measurable statements describing what students will be able to do upon completion of the program. The assessment of PLOs provide feedback on the expected knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students develop as they progress through their program.
List the program learning outcomes:

PLO# PLO Description
1. Demonstrate disciplinary skills and knowledge, applying these to analyze problems.
2. Develop meaningful evidence‐based solutions to complex problems from a position of equity and social justice.
3. Integrate personal, practical, theoretical, and empirical knowledge with systemic and systematic inquiry.
4. Communicate effectively using multiple modes.
5. Conduct scholarly and professional activities in an ethical manner.

Part 2: Development of Assessment Plan

Each plan will require the following information:
Threshold Values: Along with PLOs, plans should include threshold values; minimums against which to assess student achievement for learning outcomes. Threshold values are defined as an established criteria for which outcome achievement is defined as met or not met.
Methods of Assessment & Data Source:  Assessment plans require evidence to demonstrate student learning at the program level. This evidence can be in the form of a direct or indirect measure of student learning. Both direct and indirect assessment data must be associated with the program’s learning outcomes. An assessment rubric will also need to be included that demonstrates how evaluation of the data was used to assess student achievement.
Timeframe for Collecting and Analyzing Data:  Develop a multi-year assessment schedule that will show when all program learning outcomes will be assessed. As graduate assessment reports are biennial, faculty review of assessment results may only occur every other year, however, annual faculty meeting to review these data and discuss student progress may be beneficial.

2a. Curriculum Map

ASSESSMENT PLANNING CHART
Program Learning Outcomes Course Alignments:
Include rubric, number and course title		 Identification of Assessment Artifact
1, 5 EDU 600 – Doctoral Seminar Literature Review
1, 4, 5 EDU 650 – Dissertation Seminar Dissertation Proposal Chapter 1; Brief Chapter 2
1, 4, 5 EDU 690 – Doctoral Thesis Doctoral Dissertation
3, 5 EDU 610 – Qualitative Research Qualitative Research Proposal/Project; IRB app.
3, 5 EDU 607- Quantitative Educational Research Quantitative Research proposal/Project; IRB app.
2 EDU 612 – Critical Race Theory Final Paper/Presentation
2 EDU 613 – Indigenous Methodologies in Educational Research Research Proposal/Project; IRB app
2 EDU 643 – Leading Social Justice Action Plan
3, 4 Program Benchmark: Comprehensive Exams Written comprehensive exams with oral defense
     
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE
  Year to be assessed
PLO Course 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027
1 EDU 600- Doctoral Seminar   X     X
1 EDU 690 - Doctoral Thesis   X   X  
2 EDU 612-Critical Race Theory X     X  
2 EDU 613 - Indigenous Methodologies in Educational Research   X     X
2 EDU 643 – Leading Social Justice     X    
3 EDU 610 – Qualitative Research X     X  
3 EDU 607- Quantitative Educational Research     X    
3 Program Benchmark: Comprehensive Exams     X    
4 EDU 650 – Dissertation Seminar          
4 EDU 690 – Doctoral Thesis   X   X  
4 Program Benchmark: Comprehensive Exams     X    
5 EDU 650 – Dissertation Seminar   X     X
5 EDU 610 – Qualitative Research X     X  
5 EDU 607- Quantitative Educational Research     X    
             

Part 3: Program Assessment

The assessment plan will need to include: 1. how assessment will be conducted; 2. who receives the analyzed assessment data, and 3. how it will be used by program faculty for program improvement(s).

1) How will assessment artifacts be identified?

Assessment artifacts will be identified by program faculty in collaboration with the Director of Accreditation and Department Head. Identification of artifacts will consider how effectively each artifact provides evidence of the appropriate PLO.

2) How will they be collected (and by whom)?

Data will be collected by the Graduate Programs Coordinator, course instructors, and committee chairs as appropriate. Data may include course and project-specific grades as well as results of comprehensive exams and dissertation defenses.  

3) Who will be assessing the artifacts?

Program faculty, in collaboration with the Graduate Programs Coordinator, Director of Accreditation, and Department Head, will be assessing data on an annual basis to identify areas for program improvement. Additionally, program learning outcome assessment scores for the specific artifact assignment
will not influence the student’s earned grade in the course.

Part 4: Program Assessment Plan

All plans must include assessment rubrics (the methodology of how student artifacts are to be assessed, and a threshold for student success attainment.

PLO #1 Demonstrate disciplinary skills and knowledge, applying these to analyze problems. Threshold Values
Indicators Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 80% of students will meet or exceed Level 3
competency
Identification of problems Provides multiple perspectives on a problem relevant to their field of study Describes the complexity of a problem relevant to their field of study Identifies a problem relevant to their field of study Partially identifies a problem OR identifies a problem that is not clearly relevant to their field of study  
Contextualized analysis of problem(s) Applies disciplinary skills and knowledge to thoroughly analyze a problem relevant to their field of study resulting in a nuanced discussion of perspectives Applies disciplinary skills and knowledge to thoroughly analyze a problem relevant to their field of study Logical analysis of a problem relevant to their field of study is guided by elements of disciplinary skills & knowledge Analysis of a problem relevant to their field of study is incomplete and may include assumptions and statements not supported by disciplinary knowledge.  
PLO #2 Develop meaningful evidence‐based solutions to complex problems from a position of equity and social justice.  
Indicators Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 80% of students will meet or exceed Level 3 competency
Meaningful evidence-based solutions Designs a study utilizing appropriate, evidence-based methods firmly grounded in theory and previous literature (or gaps therein) to study a complex problem relevant to their field Designs a study utilizing appropriate, evidence-based methods grounded in theory and/or previous literature (or gaps therein) to study a complex problem relevant to their field Designs a study utilizing minimally appropriate, evidence-based methods which may or may not be grounded in theory and/or previous literature (or gaps therein) to study a problem relevant to their field Designs a study that does not utilize appropriate, evidence-based methods grounded in theory and/or previous literature (or gaps therein) to study a problem relevant to their field  
Social Justice & Equity Integrate understanding of social justice and equity into investigation of solutions related to a complex problem relevant to their field, resulting in solutions that support the vitality and self-determination of diverse stakeholders. Integrate understanding of social justice and equity into investigation of solutions related to a complex problem relevant to their field Apply minimal understanding of social justice and equity into investigation of solutions related to a complex problem relevant to their field Does not apply understanding of social justice and equity into investigation of solutions related to a complex problem relevant to their field  
PLO #3 Integrate personal, practical, theoretical, and empirical knowledge with systemic and systematic inquiry.  
Indicators Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 80% of students will meet or exceed Level 3 competency
Synthesis Synthesizes personal knowledge, as well as practical, theoretical, and empirical knowledge from the literature to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Synthesizes personal knowledge, as well as two of the following: practical, theoretical, or empirical knowledge from the literature to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Synthesizes personal knowledge, as well as one of the following: practical, theoretical, or empirical knowledge from the literature to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Does not synthesize personal knowledge, as well as practical, theoretical, and empirical knowledge from the literature to inform systemic and systematic inquiry.  
Critical Analysis Critically analyzes sources identified for synthesis to identify biases and gaps and utilizes these to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Critically analyzes sources identified for synthesis to identify biases or gaps and utilizes these to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Conducts surface analysis of sources identified for synthesis to identify biases or gaps and utilizes these to inform systemic and systematic inquiry. Conducts surface analysis of sources identified for synthesis that does not identify biases or gaps and/or utilizes these to minimally inform systemic and systematic inquiry.  
PLO #4 Communicate effectively using multiple modes.  
Indicators Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 80% of students will meet or exceed Level 3 competency
Effective Communication Consistently and successfully utilizes strategies for effective communication, including awareness of the intended audience, purpose of the communication, and clear organization and support to enhance the message. Frequently and successfully utilizes strategies for effective communication, including awareness of the intended audience, purpose of the communication, and clear organization and support to enhance the message. Inconsistently utilizes strategies for effective communication, including awareness of the intended audience, purpose of the communication, and clear organization and support. Rarely utilizes strategies for effective communication, including awareness of the intended audience, purpose of the communication, and clear organization and support.  
Communication in Multiple Modes Consistently and successfully demonstrates the ability to communicate effectively in multiple modes, including a variety of written/visual products, oral presentations, and interpersonal communications. Demonstrates the ability to communicate effectively in multiple modes, including a variety of written/visual products, oral presentations, and interpersonal communications. Demonstrates basic ability to communicate effectively in multiple modes, including a variety of written/visual products, oral presentations, and interpersonal communications. Does not demonstrate the ability to communicate effectively in multiple modes, including a variety of written/visual products, oral presentations, and interpersonal communications.  
PLO #5 Conduct scholarly and professional activities in an ethical manner.  
Indicators Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 80% of students will meet or exceed Level 3 competency
Ethical Scholarship Adhere to guidelines for ethical scholarship, including those for the protection of human subjects, as well as principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion within all scholarly activities. Adhere to guidelines for ethical scholarship, including those for the protection of human subjects within all scholarly activities. N/A N/A  
Professionalism Consistently and successfully adhere to guidelines for professional conduct, including respectful interactions with others, collegiality, and collaboration. Frequently and successfully adhere to guidelines for professional conduct, including respectful interactions with others, collegiality, and collaboration. Inconsistently adhere to guidelines for professional conduct, including respectful interactions with others, collegiality, and collaboration. Infrequently adhere to guidelines for professional conduct, including respectful interactions with others, collegiality, and collaboration.  

 

Part 5: Program Assessment Plan:

1) How will annual assessment be communicated to faculty within the department? How will faculty participating in the collecting of assessment data (student work/artifacts) be notified?

Faculty, staff, and graduate students in the department meet bi-weekly to discuss programmatic matters. The assessment reports will be communicated in a Fall department meeting each year. This will be communicated ahead of time through the weekly Monday Minutes communication that is sent out to the department community.

2) When will the data be collected and reviewed, and by whom?

Data will be collected each semester and reviewed on an annual basis by program faculty and the Assessment & Alignment Committee within the department. This committee consists of faculty and staff within the department. 

3) Who will be responsible for the writing of the report?

The report will be written collaboratively by program leadership from the three programs covered by the Ph.D. (Adult & Higher Education, Curriculum & Instruction, and Educational Leadership) with input and feedback from the faculty.

4) How, when, and by whom, will the report be shared?

The report will be shared by program leadership with the faculty at a fall department meeting. It will be sent to faculty ahead of the meeting in order to provide time for them to preview and prepare to provide feedback at the faculty meeting.

5) How will past assessments be used to inform changes and improvements? (How will Closing the Loop be documented)?

As part of each cycle’s assessment, we will set goals for continuous program improvement. These goals will be revisited throughout the cycle to determine what progress is being made toward the goals and what additional adjustments need to be made to continue progress.

6) Other Comments:

 

Submit report to programassessment@montana.edu