Action Plans: Specific changes that a given instructor or program plans to implement based on assessment results. (MUAP)
Assessment: The systematic collection, examination, and interpretation of qualitative and quantitative data about student learning and the use of that information to document and to improve student learning. (HLC/NCA); Assessment is an ongoing process aimed at understanding and improving student learning. It involves making our expectations explicit and public; setting appropriate criteria and standards for learning quality; systematically gathering, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to determine how well performance matches those expectations and standards; and using the resulting information to document, explain, and improve performance. (Angelo, 1995)
Benchmark: A detailed description of a specific level of student performance expected of students at particular ages, grades, or development levels. Benchmarks are often represented by samples of student work. A set of benchmarks can be used as "checkpoints" to monitor progress toward meeting performance goals. (CRESST)
Criteria: Guidelines, rules, characteristics, or dimensions that are used to judge the quality of student performance. Criteria indicate what we value in student responses, products or performances. They may be holistic, analytic, general, or specific. Scoring rubrics are based on criteria and define what the criteria mean and how they are used. (CRESST); Performance criteria help assessors maintain objectivity and provide students with important information about expectations, giving them a target or goal to strive for. (New Horizons for Learning)
Criterion-referenced assessment: An assessment where an individual's performance is compared to a specific learning objective or performance standard and not to the performance of other students. Criterion-referenced assessment tells us how well students are performing on specific goals or standards rather that just telling how their performance compares to a norm group of students nationally or locally. In criterion-referenced assessments, it is possible that none, or all, of the examinees will reach a particular goal or performance standard. (CRESST)
Direct Measures of Learning: Evidence about student learning based on student performance that demonstrates the learning itself. Can be value added, related to standards, qualitative or quantitative, embedded or not, using local or external criteria. Examples are written assignments, classroom assignments, presentations, test results, projects, logs portfolios, and direct observations. (Leskes, 2002)
Evaluation: The setting, or appraisal, of a value. Evaluation has to do with the rendering of a value judgment. Measurement merely positions something along a continuum, whereas evaluation posits a judgment based on a given position. (MUAP)
Formative Assessment: The gathering of information about student learning during the progression of a course or program to improve the learning of those students. Example: reading the first lab reports of a class to assess whether some or all student in the group need a lesson on how to make them succinct and informative. (Leskes, 2002) – contrast with summative assessment.
General Education Assessment: Assessment that measures the institution-wide, general education competencies agreed upon by the faculty. General education assessment is more holistic in nature than program outcomes assessment because general education competencies are measured across disciplines, rather than just within a single discipline. (MUAP) – TCC’s general education goals include critical thinking, effective communication, engaged learning and technological proficiency.
Indirect Measures of Learning: Evidence about how students feel about learning and their learning environment rather than actual demonstrations of outcome achievement. Examples include surveys, questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and reflective essays. (Eder, 2004)
Norm-referenced assessment: An assessment where student performance is compared to a larger group. Usually the larger group or “norm group” is a national sample representing a wide and diverse cross-section of students. Students, schools, districts, and even states are compared or rank-ordered in relation to the norm group. The purpose of a norm-referenced assessment is usually to sort students and not to measure achievement towards some criterion of performance. Most standardized achievement tests are referred to as norm-referenced. (CRESST)
Outcomes: Operational statements describing specific student behaviors that evidence the acquisition of desired knowledge, skills, abilities, capacities, attitudes or dispositions. Learning outcomes can be usefully thought of as behavioral criteria for determining whether students are achieving the educational objectives of a program, and, ultimately, whether overall program goals are being successfully met. (Allen, Noel, Rienzi & McMillin, 2002)
Portfolio Assessment: A portfolio becomes a portfolio assessment when (1) the assessment purpose is defined; (2) criteria or methods are made clear for determining what is put into the portfolio, by whom, and when; and (3) criteria for assessing either the collection or individual pieces of work are identified and used to make judgments about performance. (CRESST)
Qualitative measurement: Collecting information that is not numeric in nature. Qualitative data typically consist of words while quantitative data consist of numbers. These words are often assigned to categories, which can then be manipulated to help achieve greater insight into the meaning of the data and to help examine specific hypotheses. Some sources of qualitative data may include written documents [e.g., student assignments], interviews [e.g., focus groups], case studies [e.g., portfolios] and open-ended survey questions and/or questionnaires. (Trochim, 2000); The only numerical operation that can be conducted on qualitative variables is calculation of the frequency or percentage in each category. (Bailey, 1994) – In student learning assessment, qualitative data are often represented by a quantitative value by comparing the data to a scoring rubric in which the value is assigned based on a standard set of performance criteria.
Quantitative measurement: Collecting information that is numeric in nature. Quantitative data is that in which the values of a variable differ in amount [in numeric terms] rather than in kind [in descriptive terms]. (Bordens, 1997); This data can be analyzed using quantitative methods and generalized to a larger population. (Leskes, 2002)
Rubric: Specific sets of criteria that clearly define for both student and teacher what a range of acceptable and unacceptable performance looks like. Criteria define descriptors of ability at each level of performance and assign values to each level. Levels referred to are proficiency levels which describe a continuum from excellent to unacceptable product. (System for Adult Based Education Support)
Summative assessment: The gathering of information at the conclusion of a course, program or undergraduate career to improve learning or to meet accountability demands. When used for improvement, impacts the next cohort of students taking the course or program. Example: examining student final exams in a course to see if certain specific areas of the curriculum were understood less well than others. (Leskes, 2002) – contrast with formative assessment.
Value-added: The increase in learning that occurs during a course, program, or undergraduate education. Can either focus on the individual student (how much better a student can write, for example, at the end than at the beginning) or on a cohort of students (whether senior papers demonstrate more sophisticated writing skills – in the aggregate – than freshman papers). Requires a baseline measurement for comparison. (Leskes, 2002)
Sources:
Allen, M., Noel, R.C., Rienzi, B.M., & McMillin, D.J. (2002). Outcomes assessment handbook. California State University, Institute for Teaching and Learning, Long Beach, CA.
Angelo, Dr. Tom (1995). Reassessing (and defining) assessment. The AAHE Bulletin, 48(2), 7-9.
Bailey, K. (1994). Methods of social research (4th ed.). The Free Press, New York, NY.
Bordens, K.S., & Abbott, B.B. (1997). Research design and methods: a process approach (4th ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Eder, D.J. (2004). General education assessment within the disciplines. JGE: The Journal of General Education, 53(2), 135.
Leskes, Andrea (2002). Beyond confusion: an assessment glossary. Peer Review, 4(2/3).
Millersville University Assessment and Planning. Assessment Glossary.
National Center for Research and Evaluation, Standards & Student Testing (CRESST). Glossary.
New Horizons for Learning. (2002). Glossary of assessment terms.
System for Adult Basic Education Support. Glossary of useful terms.
Trochim, W. (2000). The research methods knowledge base (2nd ed.). Atomic Dog Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.