One major issue facing the field of assessment is the lack of consistency. Many people begin this job (like myself) never intending to arrive in it in the first place. Psychology being such a board brush for careers it is hard to know what to study, research, or think about before starting. As I encounter problems I want to share them here to help others who might have the same questions I did when I started. To start things off, here is Sign-In Consent Form:
I spent yesterday visiting the University of Oklahoma main campus for the annual conference on legal issues. While there, I had an opportunity to refresh my understanding of a few issues I confront in the institutional research trenches. I attended a session on FERPA issues, some basic issues surrounding intellectual property, as well as some developments on immigration law as it impacts admissions.
Patricia gave us her two cents and so we gave her our 2500 two cents in the form of an Amazon Gift card! We don’t know how much she will get to spend of it though–the kiddos sounded like they already knew what they were getting.
Recently reports began pouring into social media, gossip pages, and general news sites about a new rating system from the federal government for universities. The initiative, which has not been written yet, has created controversy in higher education circles as they fear it will impact funding. In the modern information society, however, ratings like this exist for everything from films and makeup to bottled water and podcasts. In order to stay relevant with the changing focus of how Americans evaluate a product (i.e. peer reviews) it is of paramount importance to provide this information to the general public by a nonpartisan organization at a national scale.
My final project for my Information and Society class was to choose an information organization and present a way that they would need to change in order keep up with society. Below is the paper I wrote. It covers my thoughts about the education. assessment, and social interactions that I think will guide the school and university curriculum in the future. Combining the metrics used and social feedback found in video games to solve real world problems.
It is a little shaky (it is a, let’s say, 1.5 draft). I believe the message is solid however. Thanks for reading! Continue reading →
In continuing with my research in current and past articles pertaining to universities and academic improvement I have started looking at ‘retention’ and related studies. This is in hopes of starting a research project to help keep students through their entire college careers. For this purpose I read Goodstein and Szarek’s ‘They Come But Do They Finish? Program Completion for Honors Students at a Major Public University, 1998-2010’ from the Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council (full citation is at the bottom).
Over the past few weeks I have focused on a relatively detailed reporting of USAO’s NSSE 2013 results. I mentioned a number of scales, subscales and dimensions and I flooded the blog entries with bar graphs to help you visualize how we compared to other groups. What I did not do, was spend much time discussing what all these data points, means comparisons and statistical tests actually mean. This is what I will attempt to tackle in this last NSSE post for the year (unless, of course, I get an unforeseen deluge of requests for more). In order to make sense of the comparisons featured in previous posts, it is important to know what each comparison group consists of. I thought I had addressed it already, but apparently I confused this series with the report I prepared for my boss and his executives. So here is a brief description of each of our comparison groups: Oklahoma: All post-secondary education institutions in Oklahoma participating in NSSE 2013 are included in this group. The mean (average) reported for this comparison group is computed by NSSE from student responses from these schools. The names of the specific schools included in this category are reported below: Carnegie Class: All participating post-secondary educational institutions sharing a Carnegie classification with USAO are included in this group. The names of the specific schools in this category are reported below: Continue reading →