Program
Legal Education at the Crossroads v. 3: Conference on Assessment
To View or Download the Program Document, please click here.
To View or Download the suggested advance reading, please click here.
Conference Schedule
September 11, 2009
Introduction to the Assessment Conference
4:00 – 5:00
Registration
5:00 – 6:00 PM
Welcome Reception
6:00 – 7:00 PM
Dinner
Welcoming Remarks by Dean Martin Katz
7:15 – 8:00 PM
Introduction to the Conference by Greg Munro
[Video 44 Minutes]
September 12, 2009
Conference Day 2
8:00 – 8:30 AM
Breakfast
8:30 – 10:00 AM
Large Group Presentation on Student Assessment presented by Michael Hunter Schwartz, John Burwell Garvey, and David Thomson
In this presentation, Michael Hunter Schwartz will start the discussion with an interactive, clicker-based overview of basic principles and methods of effective formative and summative student assessment. John Garvey will then describe his ground-breaking work in connection with the Daniel Webster Scholar Program (DWS) with a focus on how conference participants can apply DWS ideas to their courses and law school curricula.
He will talk about the multiple assessment methods used in DWS, including standardized clients, and the benefits of adopting multiple assessment methods. He will conclude his portion of the presentation by anticipating the future evolution of the program. David Thomson will round out the session with an exploration both of the challenges to expanding student assessment given prevailing law school class sizes and student-faculty ratios and of the technological tools available to law professors to make their efforts at assessment more scalable, i.e., workable without killing ourselves.
[Schwartz] [Garvey] [ Thomson ] [Video 90 Minutes]
10:00 – 10:20 AM
Break
10:20 – 11:05 AM
Show & Tell Session 1:
Summative Assessment
Working Professionally with Others: Summative Assessment of Students’ Small Group Contributions by Sophie Sparrow, Professor of Law, Franklin Pierce Law Center – Room 259
We know that effectively working with others is crucial for lawyers’ success, but how do we teach and measure those skills? More critically, how do we assess students’ behavior in large classes? In this session, participants will learn how to apply team-based learning research and peer evaluation to assess these skills in classes of seven to seventy-seven. This will be a hands-on session where participants will engage in team-based learning while learning about assessing students’ professional behavior.
[Materials] [Video 47 Minutes]
Thinking Critically about Teaching Goals through Designing Effective Assessment Rubrics by Sandra Simpson, Assistant Professor, Gonzaga University School of Law and Using Outcomes Measures and Rubrics to Enhance Professional Learning in an In-House Clinic by Kimberly O’Leary, Professor, Thomas M. Cooley Law School – Room 255
In this session, the presenters will describe how each came to appreciate building and using rubrics, one in a Legal Research and Writing course and one in an in-house clinical program. Then, the participants will divide into groups and draft one objective performance outcome and multiple rubrics for measuring it, with the assistance of the presenters. Participants will enhance their understanding of how to build rubrics for the classes they teach.
[Materials] [Video 47 Minutes]
Assessment for Interviewing and Counseling Skills by Sande Buhai, Clinical Professor of Law and Director, Public Interest Law Department, Loyola Law School and Assessing Interviewing and Counseling Simulations by Arnold Siegel, Clinical Professor of Law and Director of Legal Writing and Ethical Lawyering Programs, Loyola Law School – Room 270
This presentation will begin with a brief description of our Ethical Lawyering program especially focusing on the interview and counseling component. Then we will look at the different types of assessment, including, guided self-evaluation, oral assessment and written assessment. Finally, we will show some parts of actual student interviews and engage the audience in a discussion about the use of the various assessment tools.
[Materials] [Video 54 Minutes]
Summative Student Assessment through Oral Examination: A Midterm Experiment in a Small Doctrinal Class Setting and Preliminary Thoughts About Scaling the Concept to a Larger Class Environment by Joan MacLeod Heminway, Professor of Law, The University of Tennessee College of Law – Room 170
This session reviews the use of an oral midterm examination in a small (10-student) Securities Regulation class in the spring 2009 semester. The presentation describes the planning for and conduct of the assessment, focusing on (among other things) the time involved as compared to essay exams, the development of meaningful assessment rubrics, and the lack of anonymity. In the session, the instructor also shares her evaluation of the experience and her currently envisioned potential changes for use of the same assessment device in spring 2010, and brainstorms the use of a similar oral summative assessment device in a larger doctrinal class setting.
[Materials] [PowerPoint] [Video 46 Minutes]
Thinking Outside the Boxes: Using Electronic Portfolios to Encourage Student Reflection and Self-Assessment by Susan Dailey, Professor; Kevin Barry, Professor, Quinnipiac University School of Law and Structured Peer Feedback: Creating Experts from Novice Learners by Hillary Burgess, Assistant Professor of Academic Support, Hofstra University Law School – Room 155
Quinnipiac University School of Law began a pilot e-portfolio writing project two years ago to help students improve their writing by providing a framework for reflection and self-assessment. The original e-portfolio project has now been reconfigured as a collaboration between the legal skills and clinical programs, both in-house and externship. In the e-portfolio, students will collect artifacts of their learning over the course of three years. The project offers integrated opportunities for on-going guided reflection and self-assessment that unites legal writing with other lawyering experiences, all of which build skills and enable the formation of professional identity.
[Materials] [Video 47 Minutes]
Summative Assessment: Making Evidence Exams More Relevant and Realistic by Fred Galves, Professor of Law, University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law and Virtual Reality Testing: The Use of Technology in Connecting Evaluation with Realities of Courses and Practice by Kimberlee Kovach, Director, Evans Center for Conflict Resolution, South Texas College of Law – Room 125
Weeks before the exam, students receive a case packet consisting of a complaint, answer, motions, discovery exhibits (such as photographs, documents, affidavits, deposition testimony, diagrams, etc.), jury instructions, and case law (using either a real or hypothetical case). This case-packet approach more accurately models how a real attorney would become familiar with the legal, factual, and evidentiary issues in an actual case before firing off legal opinions and judgments. The students receive this case packet early so they can start to work up the case, get to know the factual background intimately, and anticipate potential admissibility issues. The students still are required to react to the exam questions and apply their legal knowledge and skill on the spot in that the students would not know exactly what may happen during the hypothetical trial or hearing until they get into the exam and have to react to the new developments in the case using their knowledge of evidence and the underlying facts.
[Materials] [Video 44 Minutes]
11:05 – 11:25 AM
Break
11:25 – 12:10 PM
Show & Tell Session 2: Formative Assessment
Incorporating Effective Formative Assessment Into Course Planning: A Demonstration and Toolbox by Barbara Glesner Fines, Associate Dean for Faculty Development, Ruby M. Hulen Professor of Law, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law; Carolyn Grose, Associate Professor of Law, William Mitchell College of Law; Peter Joy, Professor and Director of the Criminal Justice Clinic, Washington University in St. Louis School of Law; Mary Lynch, Clinical Professor of Law Albany School of Law – Room 255
This workshop will provide attendees with the methodology and tools necessary to incorporate effective formative assessment into any course. The workshop will take the form of an interactive role play in which a faculty member who wants to incorporate formative assessment into a doctrinal course consults with faculty members who are familiar with both Educating Lawyers and Best Practices for Legal Education. Through the consultation, workshop attendees will be exposed to and involved in developing a toolkit that they can then use to incorporate formative assessment into their own courses. By focusing on the goals of the course (what is to be learned) and the goals of each assessment (how each assessment will evaluate whether students are learning what is being taught), the consultation will demonstrate how the teacher should structure the assessments to be criteria-referenced (focused on the learning outcomes) and not norm-referenced (based on how students perform relative to each other). The discussion will also highlight how the teacher can use the assessments to inform students of their level of professional development, how this process relates to their proficiency in the subject matter, and how formative assessments assist students in maximizing their learning. We will emphasize the points that formative assessments are feasible, there are multiple methods for assessing student learning throughout the semester, and faculty can ensure that summative assessments are also formative assessments.
[Materials] [PowerPoint] [Video 46 Minutes]
Formative Assessment of Ethical Judgment: Clinical Course Models From the Past, Directions for the Future by Ann Juergens, Professor of Law, William Mitchell College of Law; Cathy Burnett, Professor, South Texas College of Law; Christine Cimini, Associate Professor of Law, Sturm College of Law; Gemma Solimene, Clinical Associate Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law; Alicia Alvarez, Clinical Professor, University of Michigan Law School; Donna Lee, Associate Professor, CUNY School of Law – Room 270
As the ABA moves toward an outcome measure model of assessing the work of law schools, we need to develop new assessment models and tools for the goals we seek to achieve. This interactive session will consider how one goal of many clinical programs — taking responsibility for justice in the legal system — might be assessed. We will examine evaluation models that seek to measure the students’ understanding of the impact of law on the poor and a lawyer’s responsibility for ensuring a just legal system. We will share some examples with the group and will briefly analyze their effectiveness. What are their strengths and weaknesses? Are their attempts to measure professional judgment and/or understanding of justice valid and reliable? We will then work together to develop a new assessment tool focused on this same aspect of ethical judgment that incorporates the work of educational theorist and assessment expert, Grant Wiggins.
[Materials] [Video 50 Minutes] [Session Output]
Designing Formative Assessments of Law Students’ Critical Case Reading and Reasoning Ability for Doctrinal Classrooms by James F. Stratman, Associate Professor, University of Colorado Denver and Dorothy H. Evensen, Professor, Penn State University – Room 125
This session demonstrates how law student’s critical case reading and reasoning ability may be formatively assessed as an integral part of doctrinal instruction. Our approach draws upon empirical test development research that was supported under two successive grants from the Law School Admissions Council, 2003-07. First, using two example items from one of our tests which focused a case in civil procedure, we will briefly illustrate how we drew upon a basic construct of critical case reading skills to generate test items of varying degrees of difficulty, i.e., in terms of their cognitive and contextual demands. Second, we suggest ways that short, similarly constructed sets of test items can be used at several points during a semester to integrate students’ learning of doctrinal content with the development of their critical case reading and question-asking skills.
[Materials] [Video 53 Minutes]
The Power of Positive Feedback by Paula Manning, Director and Associate Dean, Institute of Student and Graduate Academic Support, Whittier Law School and Using On-Line Problem Sets, Modeling and Email To Provide Feedback by Deborah Maranville, Professor of Law and Director, Clinical Program – Room 170
This session will explore techniques, tone and presentation in providing formative assessment to support our students’ emotional, psychological and professional needs, while simultaneously building skills. Participants will be exposed to overarching “course skills rubrics” that help students assess how their strengths and weakness evolve from one assignment to the next. They will see on-line, right answer” problem sets and answer sheets that, combined with email feedback from the teacher, helped students both understand basic doctrine in the Civil Procedure course and “show their work” by stating the rules and applying them. Additionally, the session will demonstrate changes in tone and presentation that make feedback more effective.
[Materials] [Video 48 Minutes]
Weekly Quizzes for Formative Assessment by Luke Meier, Assistant Professor of Law, Drake University Law School – Room 259
Formative assessment is widely recognized as an important component of the learning process. First-year law students, in particular, crave feedback. The large size of the standard first-year class, however, creates obstacles to systematically providing this feedback. Because of these obstacles, formative assessment often does not occur, which not only precludes an effective evaluation by the student of his or her approach to law school but also by the professor to determine whether the teaching methods used in class are successful. This session will demonstrate how the use of weekly quizzes contributes substantially to these formative assessment goals.
[Materials] [Video 43 Minutes]
Encouraging Self-Assessment: The Essential Skill by Margaret Martin Barry, Associate Professor; Catherine F. Klein, Professor of Law, Columbus School of Law, Catholic University, Beryl Blaustone, Professor, CUNY School of Law and Hillary Burgess, Assistant Professor of Academic Support, Hofstra University Law School – Room 155
Much of legal education focuses on evaluating student competencies. In courses that teach substantive law, the emphasis is on analysis of the law and its theoretical underpinnings. In clinical courses, the focus is on developing a range of lawyering skills as directly connected to the representation of clients. While formative assessment is emphasized more in clinical courses than in most substantive classrooms, student self-assessment is rarely the central goal in either setting. This interactive session will explore with participants the concrete learning goals for self-assessment, and will emphasize the centrality of this goal both for the student and the teacher.
[Materials] [Video 48 Minutes]
12:15 – 1:30 PM
The Student Perspective on Assessment
Two University of Denver students were selected by conference organizers to offer their perspective on assessment during lunch. Ian London (2L) addressed his views of the assessments he received during his first year casebook classes. Jake Spratt (3L) offered the view of upper level course assessments, and emphasized how important the subject of outcomes assessment in law school is to students. He also could not resist the temptation to call on one of the professors in the audience, and made a good (and humorous) point in doing so.
1:40 – 2:10 PM
Show & Tell Session 3: Combining Summative and Formative Assessment
Cooperative Quizzes by Mary Pat Byrn, Associate Professor of Law, William Mitchell College of Law – Room 170
This session will “show and tell” the use of cooperative quizzes which provide the setting, context, and environment in which assessment becomes part of the instructional process. In this session, you will take part in a cooperative quiz, allowing me to model cooperative quizzes as well as discuss each step in the process. I will discuss how I introduce cooperative quizzes, the types of questions I include in the quizzes, how I facilitate the quizzes, and how I grade the quizzes. I will provide handouts of cooperative quizzes that I have used in the past during the session.
[Materials] [PowerPoint] [Video 34 Minutes]
Testing Assessment Assumptions: Developing Studies to Measure the Impact of Formative Assessments on Student Learning Outcomes by Andi Curcio, Professor of Law, Georgia State University College of Law – Room 155
Law professors operate under many untested assumptions about the impact of our teaching and assessment methodologies on student learning. This presentation focuses on how to begin developing scholarship, and in particular, empirical scholarship, to test some of those assumptions. Geared toward those without a statistical or social science background, the presentation provides an overview of developing and implementing an empirical research assessment study. Topics covered include how to: identify a research question, find a social science collaborator, plan and implement an empirical study, analyze the data and write up the results. Using the information presented, participants will be asked to break into small groups to begin brainstorming about how they might develop a research study based upon their own teaching or assessment practices.
[Materials] [Video 33 Minutes]
Using Multiple Assignments to Assess Students by Melanie Jacobs, Associate Professor of Law, MSU College of Law and Pamela Perry, Associate Professor of Law, Widener University School of Law – Room 125
Professors Perry and Jacobs design and use assessments to teach their students doctrinal law and legal skills. They will describe the various assessments they use in their teaching and raise global issues regarding the use of multiple assessments in law schools. Among the global issues are: 1) teaching resources required for formative assessments, 2) using student assessments to evaluate students learning and professor teaching, 3) meaningful feedback for law students, and 4) motivating students to take advantage of multiple assessments.
[Materials] [Video 33 Minutes]
Pre-Class Transmitted Assessments: At the Intersect of Formative and Summative Assessments in Traditional Law School Doctrine Courses by Dannye Holley, Professor of Law, Center for Legal Pedagogy, Thurgood Marshall School of Law, Texas Southern University – Room 270
This presentation discusses the use of “previews” that are pre-class assessments in three substantive courses – Criminal Law, Evidence, and Criminal Procedure. In addition to discussing the instructional design of the assessment exercises, along with the measures of success of the exercises, this presentation includes a detailed illustration of one of the exercises and where it fits in the overall educational goals and objectives of the course and the sequential assessment of student skill acquisition.
[Materials] [Video 33 Minutes]
Using Online Technology to Provide Feedback Opportunities for Students in Lecture Courses Through Peer, Self, and Teaching Assistant Assessments by Tshaka Randall, Assistant Professor of Law, Florida A & M University College of Law and Vernelia Randall, Professor of Law, University of Dayton School of Law – Room 255
Most law school courses are typically assessed through a single, end-of-semester or end-of-year winner take all approach. As has been noted, this type of assessment is in all ways wrong if the goal of the assessment is to help increase student learning. For learning to occur, assessments must be frequent, accurate, and directed. The manner in which students ought to be assessed has been frequently discussed, but the means for doing so in a law school environment has proved more elusive. There are a number of barriers to assessing students in the manner generally recognized to be most effective in increasing student learning. The most frequently cited barrier is that of class size. The large size of many law school courses, especially those in the first year, makes the task of providing substantive formative and summative assessments a daunting one that many teachers are simply unwilling to undertake. However, the use of self, peer and teacher assistant evaluations, along with emerging technology, can create an environment that will allow for the frequent, accurate and directed assessments required for student learning. The presentation will address one means of providing this type of feedback.
[Materials] [Video 35 Minutes]
2:10 – 2:30 PM
Break
2:30 – 3:15 PM
Large Group Presentation on Assessment of Teaching by Gerry Hess, Professor of Law Gonzaga Law School – Room 165
Professor Munro will discuss the growth of the assessment movement in law schools, the forces behind that movement, and the impetus behind this conference. He will talk about mission and student and institutional outcomes as prerequisites to successful law school assessment programs. Finally, he will discuss the objectives and opportunities involved in this assessment conference and the format for the conference.
[Materials] [Video 29 Minutes]
3:15 – 4:00 PM
Workshop III: “Righting” the Teaching Evaluations – Room 165
Participants will work in pre-assigned groups to compare two to three example forms and will work to discuss what we hope to learn from student evaluations, rather than focusing on what questions should be in an agreed upon form.
[Materials] [Video 43 Minutes]
4:00 – 4:30 PM
Assessment of the Conference Day Using the SGID Assessment Format by Carol Wallinger, Rutgers-Camden – Room 165
In this session, conference organizers will lead an assessment of the conference so far.
[Materials] [PowerPoint ] [Video 29 Minutes]
4:30 – 6:30 PM
Break
6:30—8:30 PM
Conference Gala Dinner
Gottesfeld Room, Ritchie Center – Please see campus map in registration packet.
September 13, 2009
Conference Day 3
8:00 – 8:30 AM
Breakfast
8:30 – 10:00 AM
Large Group Presentation on Assessing Attainment of Institutional Outcome Measures – Room 165
The ABA’s Shift to an Outcome Measures Approach for Accreditation Standards by Steve Bahls, President, Augustana College
The chair of the Student Learning Outcomes subcommittee of the ABA Standards Review Committee will describe the progress the committee has made in drafting proposed changes to the ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools, which would shift the Standards from requiring certain areas of instruction (an inputs-based regime) to requiring that law schools assess whether law students are proficient in the knowledge, skills and values necessary to become an effective lawyer (an outputs-based regime). The presentation will discuss the issues the subcommittee is considering, a review of a rough, preliminary draft of what changes might look like, and will leave time for discussion.
[Materials] [Video 60 Minutes]
10:00 – 10:15 AM
Break
10:15 – 11:00 AM
Show & Tell Session 4: Moving From Student Assessment to Institutional Assessment
Getting Buy-in From Your Colleagues: The Challenges and Triumphs of Assessment Planning by Sharon Sandeen, Professor; Marilynne Roberts, Associate Professor; and Tom Romero, Professor, Hamline University School of Law – Room 125
Getting Buy-in From Your Colleagues will explain the challenges a law school faces in taking a comprehensive, program-level (top-down) approach to implementing assessment practices. Using their recent experience at Hamline University School of Law (“HUSL”), Professors Roberts, Romero, and Sandeen will explain the processes HUSL followed and the challenges it faced in drafting a comprehensive three-year assessment plan (see conference materials). Among the challenges to be addressed will be the “academic freedom,” “if-it-aint’t broke, don’t fix-it” and “dumbing-down the curriculum” arguments and the institutional distrust problem. This presentation will be an interactive examination of the primary archetypes that an institution is likely to encounter in assessment planning and how programmatic assessment can be implemented in spite of skeptical colleagues. Audience members will also be invited to participate to play other roles, including themselves.
[Materials] [Video 46 Minutes]
Developing a Comprehensive Assessment Plan: Lessons Learned by Lori Shaw, Dean; Susan Wawrose, Professor; Victoria VanZandt, Associate Professor;, University of Dayton School of Law and Getting Started: Faculty Retreat with Expert Consultant by Dee Pridgen, Dean; Denise Burke, Dean, University of Wyoming College of Law – Room 255
Members of this panel presentation will discuss assessment initiatives at the University of Dayton School of Law and the University of Wyoming’s College of Law with the goal that their experiences will benefit faculty and administrators now embarking on the assessment process. Presenters from both schools have undertaken assessment at the macro and micro levels. First, panel members will describe the process used to successfully develop an institutional assessment plan. In addition to mechanics and “how to,” this part of the presentation will focus on the roles of key players—a law school Assessment Committee, the faculty, and the university and law school administration—and provide suggestions for successful and productive interactions among these groups around the topic of assessment. We will also discuss Wyoming’s use of a faculty retreat with an expert consultant to develop “learning outcomes” for program graduates, and the ensuing faculty curriculum survey. Second, we will discuss assessment efforts by some members of Dayton’s legal writing faculty who are currently in the process of surveying recent graduates and major employers about their skills and practices. The survey data will be used to create learning outcomes for first-year LRW courses and update the legal writing curriculum to reflect the realities of current practice. Third, we will discuss Wyoming’s development of a rubric for legal research papers. Participants are encouraged to participate in this conversation around assessment and will walk away from the presentation with materials useful for engaging in assessment at both the institutional and programmatic levels.
[Materials] [Video 47 Minutes]
Making Lemonade: Using Existing Summative Data for Broader Program Evaluation by Susan Brooks, Associate Dean, Drexel Earle Mack School of Law and Pre and Post Testing: An Effective Instructional Tool for Professors and Students by Jeff Minetti, Director of Academic Success, Stetson University College of Law – Room 170
This highly interactive session will demonstrate two illustrations of assessment tools and processes that are easily replicable across contexts and across institutions. One of these examples comes from Drexel Law, which, like many schools, routinely collects student evaluations from field supervisors at the end of six month externships (which we call “co-ops”). These evaluations provide a useful assessment of individual students, and also offer a meaningful snapshot of student performance with respect to key competency areas, including research, writing, and legal analysis, interviewing, ethics, and professionalism. The second illustration comes from Stetson University College of Law, and involves the use of pre and post testing as a means for helping students and teachers discern whether students have acquired the knowledge, skills, and/or values taught. Pre and post testing can also create meaningful opportunities for students to critically evaluate their own work.
[Materials] [Video 53 Minutes]
Mapping Lawyer Competencies onto the Law School Curriculum to Confirm that it Prepares Graduates for Practice by Nelson Miller, Associate Dean, Thomas M. Cooley Law School – Room 155 – Combined Session
This session describes how law professors can map lawyer competencies drawn from professional, research, and institutional sources onto the law school curriculum to assess whether courses and co- and extra-curricular offerings teach the required competencies. The session challenges some popular myths and common premises regarding lawyer competencies, while concluding that legal education should continue its present reforms to further integrate and align instruction to practice competencies.
[Materials] [Video 20 Minutes]
How to Design a Comprehensive Summative Assessment: Some Advantages from the Thurgood Marshall School of Law First-Year Common Final Examination Process by Dannye Holley, Professor and Anthony Palasota, Professor, Center for Legal Pedagogy, Thurgood Marshall School of Law, Texas Southern University – Room 155 – Combined Session
This presentation discusses the design of a comprehensive summative assessment developed in the form of common final exams for all substantive first-year courses at Thurgood Marshall School of Law. Methods of scoring, correlations, and findings provided by a national consultant for twenty years are presented along with advantages that have been identified. It presents how the professor assigned grades within a section are “scaled” to ensure that the grades assigned in a section cannot be affected by a professor grading easy or hard. This session also presents how the comprehensive common final exam process was developed to strike a balance between the need for standardization and fairness across sections in grading standards while at the same time allowing professors the academic freedom to structure their courses in a way that best fits their teaching styles and the topics they want to emphasize.
[Materials] [Video 27 Minutes]
Building an Integrated and Sustainable Approach to Assessment: Practical Lessons In Institutional and Cross-Campus Commitment by Micah Yarbrough, Professor, Widener School of Law, Delaware Campus and Dr. Brigitte Valesey, Director at Center to Advance the Teaching of Technology & Science, ITEA, Widener School of Law, Chester, Pennsylvania and Getting Real: Using Assessment to Execute Mission by Nancy Ver Steegh, Vice Dean, William Mitchell College of Law – Room 259
This session explores how two schools, with different missions and structures, engage in student learning assessment. Presenters from Widener University School of Law and William Mitchell College of Law will describe two distinct approaches to institution-wide assessment activities and faculty engagement. Practical examples will be used to highlight unique features and shared commitments for building sustainable assessment practices. Participants will be encouraged to join in a summary dialogue of assessment opportunities and challenges.
[Materials] [Video 48 Minutes]
A Funny Thing Happened On the Way to Institutional Assessment (at Pitt Law) by Mary Crossley, Dean and Lu-in Wang, Associate Dean, University of Pittsburgh School of Law – Room 270
We will recount the largely unplanned but instructive and replicable process by which the assessment of student learning outcomes evolved from a university-imposed, administration-centered, uninspiring, anxiety-inducing exercise to a collaborative, creative, mission-clarifying, confidence-building enterprise; analyze the factors contributing to that evolution; and offer tips for integrating assessment and curricular reform.
[Materials] [ Assessing Student Learning ] [ CEAC ] [Video 42 Minutes]
11:00 – 11:15 AM
Break (Pick up Box Lunches)
11:15 – 12:00 PM
Show & Tell Session 4: Moving from Student Assessment to Institution Assessment (Repeated)
12:00 PM
Conference Concludes