Standard 2.2

 Design for the Assessment Process
The assessment process follows the decision making cycle described in the conceptual framework model. The design in Figure 2.1 illustrates the process for candidates, and the design in Figure 2.2 for programs and the unit. The planning phase includes involvement of the educational community in needs assessment based on education standards and policies, unit and institutional reviews and evaluations, and societal changes and issues impacting education. In the predicting phase, anticipated outcomes and goals are identified and measurement strategies are suggested. The COE Assessment Committee/NCATE Standard 2, the Teacher Education Assessment and Intervention Committee (TEAIC), and the COE External Advisory Committee(s) function at these phases to initiate the assessment activities. Instruments and methods of assessment are then employed in implementing data collection and analysis at critical points. Data collection and analysis procedures are conducted for candidate performance and for program/unit assessment. Transition points included in the Figure 2.1 design for candidate assessment  are described  in detail  in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 above. The assessment system also  includes  specific points of program and unit assessment .

Various units within the university are responsible for implementing the assessment process. For example, the University Testing Center is responsible for those assessments required university-wide such as the Student Course Evaluation. The College of Education is responsible for candidate dispositions assessments, portfolios, internship evaluations, unit alumni and employer surveys, and others. The Office of Institutional Research administers graduation exit surveys. The other units transmit data results to the College of Education. To interpret and summarize the data for useful decision making requires reflecting on the data results by the relevant departments and committees in the college. In the evaluating phase, the responsible departments and committees make decisions and formulate recommendations for action based on the data findings. This phase identifies modifications necessary for program revisions and unit improvements to enhance candidate performance. Finally, actions are taken in the revising phase to enforce changes dictated by the evaluation decisions and recommendations. And the process begins all over again. This assessment process is ongoing and requires continuous feedback and monitoring.

The ACE Database : Maintenance of the Assessment System Through Information Technology
Through its Educator as Decision Maker Performance-based Assessment System (EDMPAS), the College of Education has created a design for systematically collecting, analyzing, reporting, and storing data. Information technologies are a vital part of the operation and maintenance of the system. A technology-based, integrated data management system has been developed--the Advisement, Certification, Evaluation (ACE) Database. The ACE Database facilitates storing and retrieving data on candidates and monitoring candidate performance. It provides faculty advisors, department chairs, and certification officers with the tools to make sound decisions concerning candidate advisement and program management. ACE is available online to all College of Education faculty and staff. It is also used by the University College Advisement Center and the School of Graduate Studies.

Most of the general candidate information on ACE is drawn from the SCT Plus System on the Alabama State University mainframe. In addition to other application systems, SCT includes the Student Information System (SIS) which houses student information and records. Data retrieved for ACE go back to 1994 and are downloaded into a Microsoft Access database. Additional data obtained from the University Testing Center and from the dean's office (APTTP scores, internship evaluations, diversity ratings of area schools, etc.) are included on the database. Critical COE candidate assessment components indicated on ACE include the conceptual framework levels, transition points, key assessments used at the transition points, and the professional studies standards assessment. In addition, curriculum program sheets for each program area are available on ACE. This allows the advisor and the certification officer to track candidates' progress through programs of study. Each course in a candidate's curriculum has the grade awarded and the semester the course was taken.

ACE is managed by a COE faculty member in computer technology (in conjunction with university Management Information Systems (MIS) staff) who ensures that student records maintained in the database remain current. This database manager also is responsible for making modifications in assessment components when warranted. The ACE Database may be accessed and reviewed with a passcode/ID that will be provided as necessary.

The Procedure for Data Collection, Analysis, and Review
The assessment system is implemented by the director of assessment and the manager of the ACE Database who handle assessment activities in conjunction with other units within the university. Both internal and external assessment collection, analysis, and reporting activities related to the college are their responsibility. The ACE Database manager and the assessment director (and their support staff) report directly to the dean of the college. The assessment system document describes the responsibilities and the step-by-step logistics for handling assessment matters through the dean's office. The Teacher Education Assessment and Intervention Committee (TEAIC) is the central body for reviewing assessment data for initial and advanced teacher preparation programs. Data reports are shared with this committee which is composed of the dean, the assessment director, COE department chairs, and representatives from other colleges and administrative units within the university. From this committee, assessment reports are shared with the faculty in the departments through the department chairs. The Department of Instructional Support Programs is the point of dissemination and review of assessment reports for other professional school personnel programs.

Once data results are transmitted, committees and departmental faculties reflect on the findings and share summaries/interpretations with the appropriate constituencies, including external advisory councils and committees. Recommendations are made for using data findings in program reviews to determine whether the need for modifications is indicated. If needed changes are identified, the appropriate and official college and university procedures are followed to enforce the changes.

The Annual Assessment Timeline
The unit's assessment system is closely aligned with the conceptual framework. The unit's overarching goal is to prepare professional educators who are informed and responsible decision makers; thus, the unit, itself, must exhibit informed and responsible decision making. Assessment of candidate performance and program quality is an interactive, decision making process. The major assessment activities of the unit take place within the interactive and decision making contexts of the conceptual framework. As Figures 2.1 and 2.2 illustrate, the unit's assessment process coincides with the process the unit employs to prepare candidates who are decision makers: planning, predicting, implementing, reflecting, evaluating, revising. The annual assessment timeline reflects the alignment of each semester's assessment activities with the decision making process that is embedded in the interactive context described in the conceptual framework.

 The data collection, analysis, and evaluation process occurs with great regularity, as indicated in the above description of the assessment system. Assessment tools (tests, surveys, portfolios) and criteria (GPAs, course grades, credit hours) are used at designated transition points to determine candidates' successful progression through a program of study. Multiple assessment methods are currently in use to gather data from internal and external sources. The foregoing description also defines the systematic routine for evaluating courses and programs.

Table 2.5: The Annual Assessment Timeline

 The Procedure for Addressing Candidate Grievances
The college maintains a file of candidate complaints and documentation of how such complaints have been handled. The college addresses candidate grievances within the parameters of the university's student grievance policy, guidelines, and procedures. These are outlined in the “Pilot,” the student handbook published by the Office of Student Affairs. The college's grievance plan and procedures are printed in the grievance document which also contains samples of complaints and their dispensation. The file is maintained in the dean's office.

• Standard  2
   
• Standard 2.1
  • Supporting Artifacts
     
• Standard 2.2
  • Supporting Artifacts
     
• Standard 2.3
  • Supporting Artifacts