11: A Vision Beyond Measurement: Creating an Integrated Data System for Teaching Centers

Abstract

Assessing the work of teaching and learning centers is crucial to maintain the support of our institutions; however, collecting and interpreting the right data can be a challenge. This chapter explores practical strategies for integrating assessment into daily work flow in order to generate information that accurately measures our impact, helps others understand and value our work, and enables us to improve what we do, without creating a major “add‐on” task. We discuss ways to measure, track, and report work, and share means to use data for both summative and formative purposes that we hope will make the work of faculty developers easier, better, and appreciated.

Program Assessments: Success Strategies for Three Canadian Teaching Centers

“…This seems surprising as more and more offices are held accountable for the programs they present (Plank et al 2005;Sorcinelli et al 2006). Nearly all of the published literature focuses exclusively on the assessment of one faculty/college in particular, such as a medical or health sciences faculty rather than representing an assessment of a centralized university program (DaRosa et al 1995;Foley et al 2003;Halstead and Coudret 2000;McLeod et al 1997;Newland et al 2003;Steinert 2000).…”

“…Although few program assessments have been based on sound theoretical frameworks of program assessments, some teaching centers have at least developed program assessment tools that are structured upon well known pedagogical principles guiding the assessment of student learning (Plank et al 2005). Such program assessments are moving in the right direction and are much closer to reflecting sound assessment strategies.…”

“…To be successful, teaching centers must provide programs and services that will support the needs of faculty members and contribute to institutional needs and directions (Sorcinelli et al 2006). Faculty and staff members engaged in faculty development activities need tools to determine how their resources can be productively utilized, especially as many institutions are requiring more assessment and accountability of these activities (Plank et al 2005;Sorcinelli et al 2006) than before. Moreover, successful faculty development efforts will benefit from demonstrating congruence among needs, goals, and outcomes (Meurer and Morzinksi 1997).…”

“…Although program assessments are highly rated and valued in the literature, a lack of resources and information on how to design assessments specific to faculty development offices challenges most faculty developers (Milloy and Brooke 2004;Plank et al 2005;Travis et al 1996). The lack of expertise in program assessments combined with the ambiguous program assessment terminology; unanticipated time constraints to develop, run, and analyze program assessments; and potential unrealistic definition of project scope as either too broad or too narrow can make conducting an adequate program assessment quite challenging for both the novice and experienced faculty developer (Chism and Szabo 1996;Csete, April 1996;Engleberg 1991;Harnish and Wild 1992;Knowlton and Ratliffe 1992;Milloy and Brooke 2004;Travis et al 1996).…”

Building it for Them: Faculty-Centered Program Development and eManagement

“…Indeed,we havereceived a POD (Professional and Organizational Development Network in HigherEducation) grant to allow us to enhance it to a point wherewecanshareit withother faculty developers. While any information-based system takes time to manage (Plank, Kalish, Rohdieck, Be Harper, 2005), thereisno doubt that the web-based natureand automatedfeatures of thissystem results in an ultimate effectiveness in both timeand cost.…”