Search results

Because of the increasingly higher expectations of accrediting organizations, calls for greater accountability from state governments and students’ demand for an education that prepares them for a career, most hospitality programs are now required to have an effective assessment of learning outcomes process. The increasing popularity of the assessment of learning outcomes process is viewed as highly positive because it can be considered as best-practices in higher education. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This is Part 2 of a two-part article that provides an overview of the justifications for implementing an assessment of learning outcomes process, the steps that were developed by two hospitality programs, and the experiences of the two programs during implementation.

The steps in a closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process are relatively detailed; however, because of changes in expectations of stakeholders and the requirements of accreditors, they are now mandatory for most hospitality programs. Therefore, the choice is not whether to implement them, but when. From a competitive standpoint, it is to the program’s advantage to begin as soon as possible. Another factor to consider is that the implementation of a closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process will take several years to complete.

This paper is presenting a critical view of one of, if not the most important concepts in higher education, the closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process. Hopefully, the information on the process that is provided and the experiences of the two programs can shorten the learning curve for other hospitality programs.

The purpose of this study was to determine what skills students already possessed as entering first‐year students, in order to define appropriate goals and objectives for library instruction sessions occurring in the first‐year writing and critical thinking course.

A pre‐test was administered during the first two weeks of the fall 2008 semester. After one‐shot library instruction, students took a post‐test during the final exam period of the fall 2008 semester. Librarians worked collaboratively to evaluate the results of the assessment and determine the implications for the session goals and objectives.

The original goals and objectives for the library instruction sessions were out of sync with student skills. Assessment also revealed that the original goals and objectives were out of sync with librarian priorities. The results of the assessment were used to refine the goals and objectives through a collaborative process.

Instruction librarians need to evaluate their course goals and objectives as one part of the assessment cycle. Assessment can be a useful tool for aligning librarian priorities and pre‐existing student skills.

This study explains how the results of assessment can be used to close the assessment loop, concentrating on parts of the assessment cycle seldom discussed in the literature.

Because of the increasingly higher expectations of accrediting organizations, calls for greater accountability from state governments, and students’ demand for an education that prepares them for a career, most hospitality programs are now required to have an effective assessment of learning outcomes process. The increasing popularity of the assessment of learning outcomes process is viewed as highly positive because it can be considered as best practices in higher education. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This is Part 1 of a two-part article that provides an overview of the justifications for implementing an assessment of learning outcomes process, the steps that were developed by two hospitality programs and the experiences of the two programs during implementation of the seven steps. Part 1 includes foundational principles of the process and the first three of the seven steps.

The steps in a closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process are relatively detailed; however, because of changes in expectations of stakeholders and the requirements of accreditors, they are now mandatory for most hospitality programs. Therefore, the choice is not whether to implement them, but when to implement them. From a competitive standpoint, it is to the program’s advantage to begin as soon as possible. Another factor to consider is that the implementation of an effective closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process will take several years to complete.

This paper is presenting a critical view of one of, if not the most important concepts in higher education, the closed-loop assessment of learning outcomes process. Hopefully, the information on the process that is provided and the experiences of the two programs can shorten the learning curve for other hospitality programs.

The history of continuous improvement, particularly requirements to close the feedback loop, was explored through an analysis of experiences at St. Cloud State University (SCSU). A method for generating evidence of the use of assessment data is provided. Several program improvements tied to this example were cited, including increasing the number of program area reports, adding to the number of qualitative studies, and strengthening advisement. Difficulties encountered with the system included institutionalizing the approach, response rates, and workload issues.

Student learning outcomes assessment, when done right, is an ongoing and systematic process. Faculty and staff for leadership education programs often struggle to develop a comprehensive approach to assess the effectiveness of their programs, especially when those programs are offered through multiple modes of instruction. One department at a Midwestern public university has developed a thorough, five-stage process which any leadership education program can follow, regardless of size or method of delivery. This department considers three modes of instruction, including face-to-face on a traditional American campus, asynchronous online, and face-to-face at foreign universities via international partnerships. This manuscript describes the comprehensive process and offers readers considerations for implementation at their own institution.

The purpose of this paper is to report an academic library's efforts to introduce course-integrated assessment into its library instruction program. Applying a leadership change model to the process allows for a step-by-step examination of both organizational change and the creation of cultures of assessment.

Over a period of three years, course-integrated assessment was introduced into an academic library's instruction program. Rather than implementing rapid, superficial change, the process focused on transforming librarians' thoughts and feelings about their teaching and student learning. Dr John P. Kotter's eight-step process for leading organizational change is applied to explain the methodology.

Kotter's leadership change model provides a suitable framework for organizing and implementing organizational change within an academic library. However, the use of his method to create and sustain cultures of assessment proves questionable. This may not be fault of his method, but a combination of a less than perfect application of his process and unrealistic expectations of how cultures of assessment develop and function.

The paper focuses on one unit within an academic library, rather than an academic library as a whole.

Changing organizational culture, creating cultures of assessment, and/or implementing course-integrated assessment exemplify some of the challenging tasks academic libraries face in their mission to prove value. This case study provides a candid discussion of both successes and obstacles encountered in using a change leadership model to address each of these. It may also inspire other possible uses of such a model within academic libraries.

According to Meredith Farkas, investigations into the application of leadership change models to build and sustain cultures of assessment within academic libraries do not exist in the literature.

Globally, traditional and online doctoral programs face difficulties with student persistence and progression. An online doctoral school implemented a first-year program sequence taught by a cadre of 20 specialized faculty members who engage in best practices to assist students in persisting and progressing toward program completion.

This qualitative program assessment using content analysis examined the program effectiveness of one online doctoral program's first-year program sequence. Two research questions guided this program assessment, they were: RQ1. Based on online doctoral students' perspectives, what motivators contribute to online doctoral student persistence and progression in an online doctoral program? RQ2. How do online faculty contribute to online doctoral student persistence and progression? Data collection included myriad of program metrics: content area meetings (CAMs); closing the loop assessment data; faculty and student end of course survey data; and faculty and student semistructured interviews.

The resultant themes indicated that students are motivated by support from family, friends and religious beliefs; and students persist based on support from fellow doctoral students and faculty members. Additional themes revealed that faculty members motivate students through building faculty–student relationships, individual coaching, providing university resources and through clarification of program requirements; and faculty members perceive that face-to-face doctoral residencies greatly contribute to student persistence and progression through interpersonal interaction and through improved clarity.

Implications of this program assessment have far-reaching impact on how doctoral granting institutions can structure small cadres of faculty to develop interpersonal relationships with doctoral students with focus on support and development.

In light of a new paradigm to feedback, the focus shifts from how and when instructors deliver feedback to how the learning environment and the feedback practices sustain agentic behavior on feedback. Feedback produces learning if the students are given the opportunity to use and to act on it, and thus to move forward. Ample research on innovative models and designs for feedback and assessment in higher education courses exist. However, a one-size-fits-all model does not exist. Each university setting represents a unique case, and hence the replicability of a model is impossible. This poses a challenge for innovative higher education institutions (HEIs) that consider the promotion of students’ agency on feedback, a distinguishing attribute for their learning experience onsite, and in the Covid-19 inflicted transition to remote instruction. This study used content analysis to investigate how feedback and assessment feedback design, in the online component of a blended course in English for Academic Purposes, can sustain opportunities for feedback encounters and enable student uptake of feedback. After exploring the process of assessment and feedback design, different agents of the course and potential feedback encounters were mapped and analyzed in a sociocultural perspective. An established matrix of feedback for learning was used to investigate and code the feedback encounters generated in the course. The results of the content analysis indicated satisfactory student uptake of feedback and opportunities for potential feedback encounters before, during, and after the assessment. Additionally, the results pointed to the need for more feedforward and self-regulatory commentaries.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a selected bibliography of recent resources on library instruction and information literacy.

The paper introduces and annotates periodical articles, monographs, and audiovisual material examining library instruction and information literacy.

Information is provided about each source, and the paper discusses the characteristics of current scholarship, and describes sources that contain unique scholarly contributions and quality reproductions.

The information may be used by librarians and interested parties as a quick reference to literature on library instruction and information literacy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the idea of using Kotter's eight‐step model for change leadership to create a culture of assessment that is embedded in the organizational culture of an academic library.

This is a conceptual paper that examines the potential application of a business change model to an academic library change context. Each step of Kotter's model is described within the context of building a culture of assessment, supported by examples and suggestions from the literature of libraries, higher education, organizational behavior and change leadership.

While building a culture of assessment is critical for libraries in the current environment, it is a difficult and complex process that requires grassroots initiative, top‐down support and strong leadership. Kotter's model for change management provides a pragmatic structure for culture change through behavioral change and change leadership regardless of positional authority.

This paper includes best practices for facilitating a culture of assessment, including necessary resources and possible approaches.

While the literature contains articles about building a culture of assessment, no studies have applied models of change leadership from the management literature to this unique cultural process. This is the first paper that suggests concrete steps for libraries towards building a culture of assessment, even in the absence of an ideal organizational culture. The focus is also on enabling change leadership regardless of whether the change agents have positional authority.