Cultivating Faculty Support for Institutional Effectiveness Activities: Benchmarking best practices

Welsh, John F.; Metcalf, Jeff

doi:10.1080/02602930301682

Cited by 26 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is consistent with previous research and confirms that faculty are more willing to get involved with assessment when they see a clear benefit to their own teaching and learning efforts (Gray, 1997;Hutchings, 2010;Palomba & Banta, 1999;Welsh & Metcalf, 2003a).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Scholars agree that an extremely important part of creating an effective assessment program is faculty involvement (Engelkemeyer, 1995;Gray, 1997;Magruder et al, 1997;Welsh & Metcalf, 2003a). Although a number of factors including administrative leadership, institutional context, and outside pressures shape assessment practices, faculty support and involvement are essential because faculty are responsible for the actual implementation of these practices (Birnbaum, 2000;Hutchings, 2010;McClure, 1996;Welsh & Metcalf, 2003a).…”

Section: Importance Of Faculty Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment as a Scholarly Activity?

Wang¹,

Hurley²

2012

The Journal of General Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Importance Of Faculty Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment as a Scholarly Activity?

Wang¹,

Hurley²

2012

The Journal of General Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This encourages instructor buy-in to these activities. Welsh and Metcalf (2003) pointed to three best practices to get buy-in: (1) instructors are more interested in activities that are clearly motivated by the desire to improve programmes, not accountability; (2) instructors want to be personally involved; (3) instructors prefer activities that have an outcomes perspective on quality. PRISM is based on a model of tracking programme improvements that are directly related to outcomes defined by instructors.…”

Section: Successes In Implementing Prismmentioning

confidence: 98%

How an Engineering College Uses a University’s Quality Enhancement System to Generate and Manage Evidence for Multiple Accreditation and Accountability Bodies

Bender

Siller

2006

Quality in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colleges and universities interact with multiple constituents or quality monitoring groups that require programme-level assessment of student learning. These required assessments might be used to demonstrate accountability, programme improvement or a combination of both. These demands often challenge instructional faculty to choose between the competing interests of research in their discipline and research on student learning for assessment purposes. This article offers one approach for engineering departments that simultaneously makes student learning research more meaningful for instructional faculty while farming out to the central administration those jobs it does not have the time or resources to do effectively. An engineering programme is better able to ensure the ownership, development and integrity of and research into its own curriculum if it has a centralized university improvement system that presents unit-level quality management research to external market and accountability groups.

show abstract

“…Answers to three questions are typically sought when monitoring whether a HEI is indeed making strides towards accomplishing its purpose (Boehmer, 2006;Welsh & Metcalf, 2003), namely: (1) to what extent the institutional mission is being conquered, (2) whether progress is made in attaining the goals and objectives of the institution's strategic plan and (3) whether the stated educational outcomes of an institution (at programme, departmental and school or faculty levels) are being achieved. Volkwein (2011, p. 5) highlights a pertinent development of the post-2010 era in HE, namely that: 'accountability and accreditation have shifted institutions' emphases to goal attainment, program evaluation, and institutional effectiveness -with especially heightened emphasis on student learning outcomes' (authors' emphasis).…”

Section: The Following Question: How Well Is a Higher Education Instimentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a measure for student perspectives on institutional effectiveness in higher education

Ayuk

Jacobs²

2018

SA j. ind. psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orientation: This study outlines institutional effectiveness (IE) in higher education (HE) and interrogates its underlying elements from a student perspective. Following a review of contemporary perspectives on student educational outcomes, the study identifies and explores the importance of four pertinent indicators of IE in the context of a South African (SA) higher education institution (HEI). Research purpose: This study aimed to explore the structural validity and reliability of the Student Educational Outcomes Effectiveness Questionnaire (SEEQ), administered to students at an SA HEI, collecting data on their perceptions of IE. Motivation for the study: Institutional effectiveness is a contested concept in HE and several approaches to define it, using various sets of underpinning elements, can be found. The conceptualisation and measuring of IE within the SA HE sector is a hugely neglected area of research. This study therefore attempted to delineate and to gauge IE, utilising the perceptions and preferences of students at an SA HEI. Research design, approach and method: Data for this study were collected using a self-selection sample (N = 807) of students from four schools at the selected HEI. Reliability and exploratory factor analyses were performed to explore the internal consistency and structural validity of the above-mentioned SEEQ. Main findings: The reliability of SEEQ is deemed to be acceptable and the validity of the four theoretical constructs (or dimensions) hypothesised in respect of IE from a student perspective were supported. Practical/managerial implications: Preliminary empirical evidence suggests that SEEQ could be employed in a cautious manner by HEIs (especially in SA), with a view to gauge IE, as well as to promoting the scholarship and management of institutional performance and student success. Contribution or value-add: This article presents a multidimensional approach to the depiction and measurement of IE from a student perspective. It makes a handy initial contribution to a grossly under-researched phenomenon in the SA HE sector.

show abstract

Cultivating Faculty Support for Institutional Effectiveness Activities: Benchmarking best practices

Cited by 26 publications

References 6 publications

Assessment as a Scholarly Activity?

Assessment as a Scholarly Activity?

How an Engineering College Uses a University’s Quality Enhancement System to Generate and Manage Evidence for Multiple Accreditation and Accountability Bodies

Developing a measure for student perspectives on institutional effectiveness in higher education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About