Student Affairs Assessment

Theory to Practice

Gavin W. Henning, Darby Roberts

• Publisher: Stylus Publishing
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781620363386
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Student Life

With the recognition of the integral role of student affairs in student education, and with stakeholders requiring increasing accountability at a time of tight resources, it has become imperative that staff be familiar with and competent in undertaking assessment. This book provides student affairs staff with the grounding they need to integrate assessment into how they design and monitor the programs, services, and activities they create to contribute to students' development.This book is intended both as a text for student affairs and higher education master's programs, and as a practical guide for early career staff who have had little formal preparation in assessment. It can be used for self-study or in professional development workshops. For divisions, departments, or units getting started with assessment, the discussion questions at the end of the chapters can engage staff in the process of developing an effective assessment culture. This book provides a thorough introduction to all aspects of assessment, assuming no prior knowledge, and illustrated throughout with examples of application in student affairs settings. Key elements include: •Takes into account the latest standards and competencies defined by AAC&U, ACPA, AER, CAS, NASPA, and others
•Introductory and comprehensive
•Provides essential background and theory
•Covers preparation, planning and design
•Describes the full range of assessment methods
•Introduces principles and methods of qualitative and quantitative analysis
•Guidance on using and sharing results
•Addresses cultivating and sustaining a culture of assessment
•Considers ethical and political concerns
•Covers use of technology
•Illustrated throughout by examples of practice in student affairs.

I

ASSESSMENT IN STUDENT AFFAIRS

Setting the Stage

Assessment in student affairs has evolved into a vibrant field of study and practice. This unique environment provides opportunities and challenges for assessing programs, services, experiences, student development, and learning. Until recently very few publications have comprehensively addressed the distinctive topics that new professionals, assessment coordinators, midmanagers, and senior student affairs officers (SSAOs) address in their day-to-day work of planning and communication with stakeholders.

Before focusing on the current and future state of assessment, it is important to know about the roots of assessment in higher education and student affairs. Although the field is dynamic, there remain foundational publications that continue to influence the environment and provide guidance about the commitment to quality and student learning and development.

History

Although more attention has been paid to student affairs assessment in the past decade, the topic has been addressed since the development of the student affairs profession. In 1937, the American Council on Education published The Student Personnel Point of View (SPPV). That document proposed providing functions and services for the whole student in conjunction with the educational and business areas of the institution. In addition to providing admissions, orientation, career services, mental and physical health services, housing, food services, and more, the SPPV recommended evaluating extracurricular activities, social life and interests, and religious life and interests. The final entry in the list of services suggested “carrying on studies designed to evaluate and improve these functions and services” (American Council on Education, 1937, p. 4). In addition, the authors of the 1937 SPPV proposed a research agenda in four areas: student out-of-class life, faculty-student out-of-class relationships, financial aid to students, and a follow-up study of college students. In terms of the out-of-class experiences, they wrote:

College students spend the majority of their time outside the classrooms and laboratories. We have, however, no significant data as to the activities in which they engage. In order to understand the educational importance of their activities we propose that on a score of campuses throughout the country data be collected. Incidentally, this research would be relatively inexpensive since on every campus individuals may be found to do the work without compensation. (p. 13)

After World War II, the American Council on Education revisited its philosophical stance as it saw changes in the United States and higher education. Building upon the 1937 document, it published a revised edition of The Student Personnel Point of View (American Council on Education, 1949), expanding the elements of the student personnel program to provide for the development of the individual as a member of society. Once again, assessment was a key component of the student affairs functions. The council encouraged “a continuing program of evaluation of student personnel services and of the educational program to ensure the achievement by students of the objectives for which this program is designed” (American Council on Education, 1949, p. 29). Moreover, it requested that every staff member devote significant time to planning and evaluation to improve services and develop students. The 1949 SPPV outlined the following criteria for evaluating programs: (a) student satisfaction and dissatisfaction with services should be assessed, either formally or informally; (b) faculty should be asked about their satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the student personnel program; (c) student use of services should be recorded; (d) staff development and training needs to be continually improved and recognized; and (e) the relationship between student personnel staff and faculty and other staff needs to be evaluated for quality and cooperative efforts. These criteria are still relevant in the twenty-first century.

In the middle of the twentieth century, the concept of student development theory gained acceptance out of human development theory as social scientists began to research how students changed and grew throughout their college careers. Researchers focused on the transition from adolescence through adulthood, how people affect and are affected by their environment, and how students view their world. Based on that research, the role of student affairs professionals shifted and the expectation to measure student development grew (Evans, Forney, & Guido-DiBrito, 1998). Assessment methods, both qualitative and quantitative, emerged as a way to capture growth and learning over time.

In 1979, the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) (2012d) created a coalition of functional area student affairs and higher education associations to promote professional standards and assessment to improve the programs and services across the institution. With focus on quality, CAS established a set of guidelines for a variety of functional areas and continues to adapt, hone, and create more standards and expectations as the nature of higher education and student affairs changes. The standards can be used for program review and self-study, as well as external review. In 2006, CAS created specific standards for assessment services, giving recognition to the importance of the growing field. The assessment services standard follows the format of the other functional areas but also provides specific verbiage about collaborating with institutional research; assessing needs, learning, and effectiveness; consulting literature; acknowledging limitations; and connecting to strategic initiatives.

The American Association for Higher Education (Astin et al., 1992) published Nine Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning, which provided criteria to incorporate assessment into higher education, particularly student learning. Although the document does not specifically address the cocurricular area, the statements are broad enough to include student affairs practice. These statements are as follows:

1. The assessment of student learning begins with educational values.
2. Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time.
3. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes.
4. Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those outcomes.
5. Assessment works best when it is ongoing, not episodic.
6. Assessment fosters wider improvement when representatives from across the educational community are involved.
7. Assessment makes a difference when it begins with issues of use and illuminates questions that people really care about.
8. Assessment is most likely to lead to improvement when it is part of a larger set of conditions that promote change.
9. Through assessment, educators meet responsibilities to students and to the public.

These nine criteria emphasize the importance of the need for assessment to be thoughtfully incorporated into the student experience, coordinated across the campus, and forward thinking. In higher education and student affairs in the late twentieth century, there was a clear shift from satisfaction and informal assessment to student learning and formal assessment. For example, whereas departments of residence life have been (and still should be) concerned with student satisfaction, there is more of an emphasis on what students are gaining through their on-campus experiences, such as living-learning communities. Administrators may want to know if living on campus has a positive impact on grades, first- to second-year retention, and the ability to work in diverse groups. Assessment in those areas has become more sophisticated and focused.

In more recent years, ACPA, recognizing the changing higher education environment, published The Student Learning Imperative (1994) to move the student affairs profession forward with an intentional focus on student learning, not simply student services. Once again, assessment was a key issue. Specifically, one of the characteristics of a learning-oriented student affairs division was defined as follows: “Student affairs policies and programs are based on promising practices for the research of student learning and institution-specific assessment data” (p. 4). Student affairs professionals were expected to not only be experts on students and how they spent their time but also integrate and synthesize information from faculty and others and then to disseminate that information to stakeholders. In order to contribute to the body of knowledge about student learning and development, student affairs staff must collect and report information about their contribution to the institution’s mission. This includes assessing policies, practices, programs, and services. One of the challenges is that in academic affairs the reporting may focus on curricular assessment and student grades, whereas student affairs assessment is less structured. In order to demonstrate their contribution, staff must be versed in assessment and student learning, and graduate programs should prepare new professionals in the area.

In 2004, NASPA and ACPA published Learning Reconsidered: A Campus-wide Focus on the Student Experience (Keeling, 2004), recognizing that learning is a complex endeavor in which student affairs plays an important role in the integrated process. Learning is “a comprehensive, holistic, transformative activity that integrates academic learning and student development, processes that have often been considered separate, and even independent of each other” (p. 4). Further, student affairs staff provide an additional benefit because of their role in working with students who are applying what they are learning in the classroom as well as developing life skills. Staff are able to engage students in application, integration, and reflection in out-of-class experiences.

At the institutional level, student affairs should collaborate with academic affairs and others to assess and document learning experiences and expected graduate outcomes. At the same time, Keeling (2004) recognized that satisfaction assessment plays a role and that multiple methods should be used to develop a clear understanding of students’ experiences. In sum, “all institutions should establish routine ways to hear students’ voices, consult with them, explore their opinions, and document the nature and quality of their experience as learners” (Keeling, 2004, p. 28).

The Current Higher Education Context

Higher education has become increasingly complex in a political environment. “Assessment in public higher education is no longer simply an ‘add-on’ or something that is peripheral to the institution’s overall education program. It is at the center stage of colleges and universities” (Sandeen & Barr, 2006, p. 136). In student affairs, the expectation is to assess and address issues such as sexual assault, alcohol and drug abuse, mental health, and the climate for diversity, in addition to focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, and cocurricular learning. Student affairs needs to be included in the institutional strategic plan and assessment, even when it is not directly connected to the larger picture. These political, environmental, and ethical issues lead to a focus on accountability.

Wehlburg (2008) has suggested that higher education has been more concerned with accountability than quality improvement:

Data have been collected (and filed, piled, and stored) for the benefit of others. But it seems clear that higher education has not done a very good job of using assessment data to improve student learning or the quality of the undergraduate experience. (p. 2)

There is a tension between data collection for external stakeholders (accountability) and internal audiences (improvement). Although both are essential, how people actually spend their time and resources will be guided by campus leaders. Showing others what is happening at the institution may take precedence over focusing on improving the teaching, learning, and engagement.

The federal government has been increasingly concerned with education—more specifically higher education as a preparation for career success. “As a result of President Obama’s goal to increase the number of college graduates by 60% by 2020, colleges and career readiness have become focal points for K−12 reform” (Finley, 2012, p. 28). There are concerns with the cost of education, time to complete a degree, student debt, and employment rates. Smith and Sponsler (2014) have recognized the importance of communication with employers in this area:

The process surrounding creation of Gainful Employment regulations provides a reminder to college administrators to engage employers in discussions about higher education. It would be wise to confirm with employers that academic preparation, cocurricular programming, and support services are well aligned with the needed skills and competencies, and that sufficient job openings exist (or are projected to exist) before institutions offer and administer new career-oriented programs. (p. 30)

Career services, academic advising, financial aid, and other support areas need to be proactive in their efforts to serve students. Assessment of these areas, which may or may not belong in a division of student affairs, can provide more information about career preparation and success.

Higher education has been under more scrutiny in recent years, with statements from the president of the United States to accreditation agencies to individual institutions. President Obama (White House, n.d.) saw the importance of higher education as an economic issue, recognizing the fact that the United States has fallen behind in degree attainment. He has also challenged Americans to enroll in college or other forms of postsecondary education for at least a year. At the same time he understands that everyone has a responsibility to keep cost down, that community colleges occupy an important place in the education market, and that there needs to be more transparency and accountability to the American public.

Stakeholders are questioning the valu...