As our office continues to develop, we’re starting to implement smaller assessment pieces to pair with larger programs. Two years ago, we created an assessment of our academic advising; probably a good place for an advising office to start. Since then, we’ve initiated assessments for our Peer Advising program (student staff who support our office) and our Peer Mentor program (a mentorship program we offer the students we serve).
This week, we discussed the addition of a new assessment for our probation program. We’ve established a structured process for our students not performing well academically but do not yet have a means of evaluating this effort. I thought I’d share some of my thoughts on this assessment; as disconnected and undeveloped as they may be.
This is a difficult group to assess. For one thing, we put a lot of work into developing relationships with our students. I don’t want to jeopardize that relationship with an end of term You failed your classes. Here, take this survey and become a row on a spreadsheet survey. These students need to feel like their advisor knows them. That’s an assumption, but I’d like to hear form those who disagree. I can’t help but feel that collecting data from them directly treats them like mail on a conveyor belt.
Beyond that, we make a lot of assumptions on what’s “good” or “right” for this group. For example, that they’re attending tutoring or meeting with a counselor. It’s quite possible for a student to completely follow the plan we lay out in September, and find themselves struggling again. If we decide Steve should be using a planner, and he uses the planner dutifully all semester and struggles, does this mean our process is working? Most can agree that a successful GPA is an important outcome, but if we look solely at GPA, we might miss a lot of relevant progress a student is making. Would then a lighter/easier class schedule skew the assessment — making it look like a student was making more progress than they really did?
What are we assessing here? Clearly, GPA is important; but can’t a student make progress personally without doing well academically? In such case, should our assessment conclude that our process is not succeeding?
Just who are we assessing here? How much impact can we make on a student? Though we’re charged with supporting the student, we’re not the ones taking the exams. Should our assessment measure a student’s progress or how well they adhere to our support program? If the former, it seems we’re measuring a group’s natural talents — that is, a good group might skew the data to make it look like our process is working. If the latter, we’re assuming that we know what’s right for the student and perhaps ignoring what’s really important. Yes, that was vague on purpose.
The question to statement ratio in this post is a bit out of control, I apologize for that. I’ll keep thinking and perhaps put together a post with some practical thoughts rather than the broad ones I pose above.
Keep on keeping on and if you have any thoughts, please reply.