Some argue online institutions and programs seem to be leading the way when it comes to finding out what their students learn. Students are given many tests from the moment they are accepted until well past their graduation. The intent is to assess what and how much knowledge the student gained during their tenure as a student at these institutions, to assess how effective the curriculum and instruction is, and to gain credibility and respect from traditional institutions of higher education by providing hard data that attests to their credibility and value. Assessment data are constantly being examined by the administering institutions in order to come up with new and more effective strategies to best serve their students. Traditional institutions of higher education could learn a few things from the assessment practices of online learning institutions.
The University of Phoenix is leading the way on assessment among online institutions. University of Phoenix administers assessment before and after each student’s tenure. Assessment methods include standardized tests (purchased from companies like ACT and the Educational Testing Service) and applied projects. Applied projects are assignments given to students to measure how well they can complete a task related to their field of study through methods learned within the online classroom.
There are a few reasons whey online institutions are focusing so heavily on assessment. First, they feel assessment is integral to the investigation into how much the students are learning while attending. They want to make sure their students are getting the kind of knowledge they need to be competitive in the field of their future employment. Moreover, in an effort to improve practices for the future, the institutions value information about what parts of the learning process were effective/ineffective.
Second, these assessments not only measure how much the students are learning but also how effective the instructor and curriculum are. If a student is doing poorly, the assessment will help indentify why. These assessments are ways of improving the institutions self-accountability. They want to make sure their product is relevant and useful to their students. These assessments hold professors accountable for delivering knowledge effectively to their students. They also address whether the curriculum is sound, however, most of the curriculum is similar between many online institutions because effective and positively assessed courses are sold to other institutions. The pervasiveness of certain curriculum among online colleges coupled with the individual institutions assessment of the curriculum helps to identify the most potent curriculum.
Third, online institutions are leading the way and being vigilant and aggressive with assessment is not just for the sake of the student. They are also concerned with being viewed as credible institutions of higher education by their counterparts, traditional institutions of higher education. Online institutions feel assessment is a way of proving their worth as legitimate higher education educators. By showing, with these implemented assessment tools, their students are learning effectively, they feel other institutions will have no choice but to view them as peers. The idea is that because traditional institutions generally feel strongly about research and empirical evidence, assessment may help validate online institutions operation in the business of higher education.
I think these are all valid reasons for assessment, and agree that there is much traditional institutions can learn from the assessment methods of these online institutions. If traditional institutions want to keep their students in an increasingly competitive market, they will find ways to improve their operations and the product they deliver.
Traditional institutions have been relying on the public’s confidence in them for far too long, a confidence present without real assessment of learning outcomes. They certainly do not want to be regulated by the national government. These institutions have had a long history of fighting mandated assessment by the national government that dates back to the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965; and the several reauthorizations of the HEA since. With each reauthorization there are attempts to assess higher education’s students and what they have learned. However, many higher education interest groups have done very well to lobby and keep mandated federal assessment away from higher education. To the governing bodies, calling for assessment is a way of knowing that money is being invested properly and efficiently. However, traditional institutions are entrenched in their autonomy and refuse to let others impose assessment regulations upon them.
Some traditional institutions do participate in assessments, however, they are voluntary and the institutions are not accountable for or required to report findings. In fact, there is little incentive to report these findings because the public opinion is not one of questioning student outcomes at this point because perceived quality is good (Lowry, 2009).
If traditional institutions will not let others help them with assessment, they must then hold themselves more accountable for the learning outcomes of students who graduate and walk out their doors with undergraduate and graduate degrees.
Traditional institutions could look to the online institution as an example of effective self-assessment. This would require them to partake in a large piece of humble pie, but if they could manage to get it down their gullet, it would only benefit them and their students.
As far as assessing student outcomes, traditional institutions could adopt the method used by the University of Phoenix. The students could be tested through standardized testing methods prior to entrance, and upon graduation. This method would ensure the institution was truly delivering a valuable education in which the student could be competitive in the job market. If these assessments determine the institution is not delivering this kind of education, they will be able to address the problem and fix it.
Traditional institutions can also learn from online institutions in the area of self-assessment or institutional assessment. This is important because it keeps the institution in touch with a sense of accountability for providing valuable information and a credible education. This includes professor accountability, making sure the professor is fulfilling their responsibility as an effective facilitator of knowledge.
Lastly, online institutions conduct assessment to show worth to their traditional counterparts. However, I think traditional institutions need to validate their worth, but to their students. They should be conducting assessment to show their worth not only to their students, but also to their students’ parents. Higher education is accompanied by a pretty hefty price tag these days. Don’t the people footing this bill deserve to know more about the quality of the education being delivered?
http://chronicle.com/article/Assessment-Takes-Center-Sta/7191/
http://chronicle.com/article/Online-Learning-Reaching-O/48375/
Lowry, R. (2009). Reauthorization of the Federal Higher Education Act and accountability for student learning: The dog that didn’t bark. Publis: The Journal of Federalism, 39(3), 506-526.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Chris. I am not sure I agree, however I am sure you were writing this from the devil's advocate position.
ReplyDeleteYou said that online institutions rely on assessment as a means of validating the efficacy of their pedagogy. Why do traditional institutions need to do this. Afterall, they are.. traditional. If an institution conducts assessment of all incoming and outgoing students and shows great results, yet the employment rate 6 months after graduation is less than 50%, does anyone care that the assessment yielded good results?
Perhaps graduates from online institutions are not having the same success in the job market as their traditionally educated counterparts. Perhaps online institutions need assessment to entice future students to online proprietary degrees. And, perhaps, online for-profit institutions are hoping that assessment generates buy-in fom potential employers of their graduates.
-adam lowrance
I would be interested in knowing more about the assessments used by the University of Phoenix for determining if they are truly delivering ‘a valuable education in which the student could be competitive in the job market’. What exactly are they assessing? Do they assess actual skills or their student’s perceptions about what they learned? I am sure they can assess some basic knowledge, but how did they go about assessing whether students can apply it? This is an exceedingly difficult task. Instead, I would assume the UofP might say that they assess each students’ ability to apply course work knowledge at the end of each course, either in terms of a final exam or applied project.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the job market and employment, for the past 20+ years employers have consistently reported wanting potential employees to posses the following skills/characteristics
1. Communications Skills (listening, verbal, written). By far, the one skill mentioned most often by employers is the ability to listen, write, and speak effectively.
2. Interpersonal Abilities. The ability to relate to your co-workers, inspire others to participate, and mitigate conflict with co-workers is essential given the amount of time spent at work each day.
3. Analytical/Research Skills. The ability to assess a situation, seek multiple perspectives, gather more information if necessary, and identify key issues that need to be addressed. In other words, highly analytical thinking with demonstrated talent for identifying, scrutinizing, improving, and streamlining complex work processes.
4. Multicultural Sensitivity/Awareness. The ability to demonstrate a sensitivity and awareness to other people and cultures.
5. Flexibility/Adaptability/Managing Multiple Priorities. The ability to manage multiple assignments and tasks, set priorities, and adapt to changing conditions and work assignments.
6. Leadership/Management Skills. The ability to take charge and manage your co-workers.
7. Computer/Technical Literacy. The ability to use computer hardware and software, especially word processing, spreadsheets, and email.
8. Teamwork. The ability to work with others in a professional manner while attempting to achieve a common goal.
Assessing these skills/characteristics (and if students develop them as a result of classroom teaching) is darn near impossible.
I do not disagree that assessment can (and does) have a role at traditional institutions, but the devil is truly in the details when it comes to what is really being assessed.