Conversation
Feedback

We want to hear from you!

BYU-Idaho values suggestions and ideas that can improve the university.
Use our Feedback Form to let us know what you think.

Conversation
Feedback
Brigham Young University Logo

Assesment

PART II: POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

PART TWO: FOUR DIMENSIONS OF FOUNDATIONS ASSESSMENT

I.  Student Learning

·         Done at the team/course level

1.      Define outcomes that reflect the team's desires for student learning. Outcomes do not need an explicit assessment instrument to be valid.

2.      Each semester use two instruments (one direct, one indirect) to assess one or more outcomes. Do not try to assess all course outcomes every semester.

3.      At the end of the semester the team aggregates data and decides on one course of action based on the evidence from each assessment exercise.

4.      The Foundations office will gather reports of team assessment activity and aggregate it as program-wide data.

5.      Observations from these activities will be reported semi-annually to the President's Council and used to inform program decisions.

II.  Student evaluations-Likert scale

·         Student evaluations are collected and complied by the Office of Institutional Assessment

·         Foundations Office aggregates the data and studies patterns.

·         Patterns will be reported to President's Council and used to inform program decisions.

III.  Student evaluations-comments

·         Student comments from student evaluations will be compiled, aggregated, and summarized numerically.

·         These data will be presented semi-annually to President's Council and used to inform program decisions.

IV.  Class observations

·         The Dean of Foundations, the Associate Dean of Foundations, and Foundations area chairs and team leads will make coordinated class visits.

·         The visitor will observe through the lense of student experience and respond to questions according to the following rubric:

1.  Assessment of preparation activities

a.       Was the preparation activity clearly defined?

b.      Was the assignment appropriately rigorous?

c.       Does the assignment encourage student engagement?

d.      Does the assignment adequately prepare the student for class?

2.      Assessment of class

a.       Were the students prepared participate in class?

b.      Was the teacher prepared to engage the students?

c.       Is there an appropriate balance between the teacher sharing information and the students teaching one another?

d.      What activities encouraged student engagement? During which activities did the students seem to "check out"?

e.       What connections were made between the class and the preparation material; between today's assignment and the rest of the course; between what the student learns in this course and the rest of their education; and between their college experience and the rest of their lives?

·         Data from the observations will be compiled, aggregated, and summarized numerically.

·         These data will be presented to semi-annually to President's Council and used to inform program decisions.

 

 

 

 

 

PART THREE: THE ASSESSMENT REPORTING PROCESS

I.  Team/Course Evaluations

A. Each semester a team lead will report on whether or not the team is following several key practices:

•      How often does the team meet?

•      How many team members did not participate in any team meetings?

•      Does the course have well-defined outcomes?

•      Does the team follow the assessment plan outlined above in Student Learning?

B.  Annually the team lead will provide the Foundations office with data needed to complete the University Scorecard (See Section II below).

C.  Biennially a team/course will undergo a thorough review conducted by the Dean of Foundations

•      What is the team lead doing to engage the face-to-face team?

•      What is the team lead doing to reach out to the online instructors for the course?

•      How common are the face-to-face courses?

•      How integrated are the various modes of delivery?

•      Does the course make use of the BYU-Idaho Learning model?

•      Does the team meet together often to improve student learning?

•      Does the course have clearly delineated outcomes?

•      Does the course achieve university and program-level outcomes?

•      What academic skills does the course develop?

•      Does the team follow the assessment plan outlined above in Student Learning?

 

II.        University Scorecard

Assessment data will provide the following indicators on the University Scorecard

•          Percentage of courses integrating the Learning Model

•          Percentage of courses that have syllabi content in common

•          Percentage of teams that meet regularly

•          Percentage of teams who follow an assessment plan

•          Percentage of teams engaged in peer classroom observation

•          Percentage of Foundations sections visited by the Dean, Associate Dean, Area Chair, or Team Lead within the past year

•          Percentage of faculty who received a load release to prior to teaching first semester of a course

•          Percentage of courses that have integrated delivery across all modes of delivery

 

III.       President's Council Reports

The Dean and Associate Dean of Foundations will aggregate data from all Foundations assessment activity and present a report to the President's Council semi-annually