Assessment is expected as part of my institution's continuous improvement process. Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Similar documents
2015 Faculty Survey of Assessment Culture

Frequency Distributions 2014 Administrators' Survey of Assessment Culture

Inventory of Best Practices for Learning Support Centers in Higher Education

City University of New York Faculty Survey of Student Experience (FSSE), Spring 2010

Kansas College and Career Ready Standards for English Language Arts Grade 4

Collect and analyze data on motorcycle crashes, injuries, and fatalities;

We trust that these data are helpful to you. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Dr. Joe Ludlum at or

Aldo Dagnino. ABB Inc. US Corporate Research Center Raleigh, NC. A Methodology for Determining the Organization s Readiness for Process Improvement

Employee Compensation 2014 Band 60, ,999.99

A Correlation of. Scott Foresman. Reading Street. Common Core. to the. Arkansas English Language Arts Standards Grade 3

The Midas Touch Guide for Communication Management, Research and Training/ Education Divisions Page 2

Institutional Research and Planning 440 Day Hall Ithaca, New York PULSE Survey

2013 Revised Alabama Course of Study English Language Arts Grade 3

2013 PLS Alumni/ae Survey: Overall Evaluation of the Program

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core 2013

Hours of Service (HOS)

Employee Compensation 2015 Band 60, ,999.99

NewsTrain Host Guide 2018

Gains in Written Communication Among Learning Habits Students: A Report on an Initial Assessment Exercise

PROMOTING THE UPTAKE OF ELECTRIC AND OTHER LOW EMISSION VEHICLES

Cluster Knowledge and Skills for Business, Management and Administration Finance Marketing, Sales and Service Aligned with American Careers Business

Your web browser (Safari 7) is out of date. For more security, comfort and. the best experience on this site: Update your browser Ignore

NEW GRADUATE PROGRAM

Pros and cons of hybrid cars

CONTACT: Rasto Brezny Executive Director Manufacturers of Emission Controls Association 2200 Wilson Boulevard Suite 310 Arlington, VA Tel.

Final Administrative Decision

Site Technology Device Management and Theft Prevention Plan

NSSE 2017 U.S. Summary Frequencies

INTERNET ACCESS GOALS AND PLANS

Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent

European Responsible Care Award Celanese Contractor Safety Improvements. About Celanese

Powertrain Acceptance & Consumer Engagement Study. Chrysler Powertrain Research March

Plattsburgh Downtown Parking Study

Evaluating Stakeholder Engagement

Rhode Island Division of Public Utilities and Carriers & Office of Energy Resources. Power Sector Transformation

Learning Objectives. Become familiar with: Elements of DWI offenses Implied consent Chemical test evidence Case law

Knowledge and the PACC project: Building, sharing, learning

FALL 2007 MBA EXIT SURVEY (Sample size of 29: 15 responses from the San Marcos location and 14 responses from the RRHEC location)

Diagnostic. Enlightenment. The Path to

University of Alabama Faculty Climate Survey

Car Sharing at a. with great results.

2011 ANNUAL COMMITMENTS

R I T. Rochester Institute of Technology. Human Powered Vehicle Team Sponsorship and Information Packet

Arapahoe Community College Castle Rock Campus Assessment Plan Data

Coordinating Process Improvement in Multiple Geographically Dispersed Development Organizations Using CMMI. Aldo Dagnino and Andrew Cordes

COMFORT FOR LIFE DUCTLESS WALL & FLOOR MOUNTED HIGH-EFFICIENCY HEAT PUMP 20 SEER UP TO 12.5 HSPF UP TO 13 EER INVERTER, VARIABLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR

CENTRAL TEXAS COLLEGE AERM 1445 AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS-A. Semester Hours Credit: 4 INSTRUCTOR: OFFICE HOURS:

SPEECH. By Hon. Isak Katali Minister of Mines and Energy. Launch of the First Energy Shop. Mariental. 13 June 2011

Riders Helping Riders: An Alcohol Peer Intervention Program for Motorcyclists

Employee Compensation 2016 Band 60, ,999.99

Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts Grade 3

2009 Community College of Student Engagement (CCSSE) College Results: Frequency Distributions

Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

RE: Comments on Proposed Mitigation Plan for the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust

That s why Kawasaki chose Cooperate to assess their current relationships, and recommend the best ways to elevate them to partnerships.

Commitment to Innovation Leads Fairchild International to Launch New AC Scoop Powered by Baldor Products

2.1 Faculty: Employees of the University defined by PS 10.A Staff: benefits-eligible employees of the University, excluding Faculty.

Higher National Unit Specification. General information for centres. Electrical Motors and Motor Starting. Unit code: DV9M 34

Metropolitan Community College Proposed Plan to Administer the General Fund Budget By Area and Cost Center

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core Grade 6, 2013

Frequency Table. UDSAT Satisfaction with UD. Cumulative. 1 Very Dissatisfied. Valid. 2 Dissatisfied. 3 Satisfied. 4 Very Satisfied. Total.

I would like to work for Eddie Stobart but am not sure if I will enjoy driving for a living should I apply?

Louis Bull Tribe s Journey:

An Evaluation of the Relationship between the Seat Belt Usage Rates of Front Seat Occupants and Their Drivers

innotrans 2014 mobility the future of september BErliN English innotrans.com

Reading Standards for the Archdiocese of Detroit Grade 1

BENCHMARKING URBAN TRANSPORT-A STRATEGY TO FULFIL COMMUTER ASPIRATION

Mileage Fees. What has been done? What is happening now? What do you need to know?

75 percent of highly engaged employees think they can reduce costs and improve customer service and quality, according to Towers Perrin.

Stationary Bike Generator System (Drive Train)

6/6/2018. June 7, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

LEAP: LSC Evaluation and Achievement Program

ecognition of Prior Learning (RPL)

Start Your Own Food Truck Business Cart Trailer Kiosk Standard And Gourmet Trucks Mobile Catering Bustaurant Startup Series

Georgia Southern University Course Evaluations Page 1

Mobile Food Vendors Policy. 1.0 Purpose. 2.0 Policy NO Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

March, Status of U.S. Electric Drive Energy Learning Network Webinar. United States Department of Energy

2020 Proposal Plan: Battery Drop Off Recycling. A Proposal Plan for ENVL 4300 Professor: Tait Chirenje

Environmental and Conservation NGOs Operational Profile 1.1 What are the main activities of your organization? WWF was established in We are a s

Motorcycle Safety Program Assessments

HATBORO-HORSHAM HIGH SCHOOL PARKING PROCEDURES AND ENFORCEMENT GUIDELINES

Metropolitan Community College Proposed Plan to Administer the General Fund Budget By Area and Cost Center

Centerwide System Level Procedure

Quality Assurance & Research Efforts. RiderCoach Surveys: Comparing Results from 2003 and Sherry Williams

The Role of Research in Transit Operations

CMMI Opens the Gate: The Practical Relationship between CMMI and Stage- Gate Decision Models

Survey of users of wheelchair seat elevators

AAA ON THE ISSUES

Protecting Occupants

Test-Retest Analyses of ACT Engage Assessments for Grades 6 9, Grades 10 12, and College

THE HUMAN ELEMENT Motorcycle Rider Training and Education

Employee Compensation 2017 Band 60, ,999.99

News English.com Ready-to-use ESL / EFL Lessons Barack Obama s supercar shown to the world

FAMU Completers Satisfaction Survey Results 2010

SDG&E Electric Vehicle activities

MATRIX BY DOMAIN ATHLETIC TRAINING EDUCATION COMPETENCIES, 5TH EDTION FOR THE ATHLEIC TRAINING EDUCATION PROGRAM

UfM Ministerial Declaration on Energy

2016 JAPANESE AMERICAN LEADERSHIP DELEGATION TO JAPAN 16TH DELEGATION March 5 12, 2016

CALL FOR APPLICATIONS FOR THE SELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE TACHOGRAPH FORUM

JOB TITLES AND PAY GRADES Job Title Pay Grade Job Title Pay Grade

Transcription:

2015 Faculty Survey of Assessment Culture Frequency Tables Pellissippi State Community College 61 Respondents out of 321 invited = 19.00% response rate Scale: =6; =5; Only Slightly =4; =3; =2; Strongly =1. Empty response categories have been omitted. Assessment is expected as part of my institution's continuous improvement process. Only Slightly Frequency 31 50.8 50.8 50.8 27 44.3 44.3 95.1 3 4.9 4.9 100.0 100.0 Assessment is an exercise primarily for compliance purposes. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 7 11.5 11.5 11.5 14 23.0 23.0 34.4 18 29.5 29.5 63.9 1 1.6 1.6 65.6 16 26.2 26.2 91.8 5 8.2 8.2 100.0 100.0 The purpose of assessment depends largely on who is asking for assessment results. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 18 29.5 29.5 29.5 25 41.0 41.0 70.5 8 13.1 13.1 83.6 3 4.9 4.9 88.5 6 9.8 9.8 98.4 1 1.6 1.6 100.0 100.0 Page 1

The purpose of assessment is clearly understood at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 8.2 8.2 23 37.7 37.7 45.9 21 34.4 34.4 80.3 3 4.9 4.9 85.2 8 13.1 13.1 98.4 1 1.6 1.6 100.0 100.0 If assessment was not required I would not be doing it. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 6 9.8 9.8 9.8 8 13.1 13.1 23.0 2 3.3 3.3 26.2 2 3.3 3.3 29.5 28 45.9 45.9 75.4 15 24.6 24.6 100.0 100.0 Assessments of programs are typically connected back to student learning. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 13 21.3 21.3 21.3 24 39.3 39.3 60.7 13 21.3 21.3 82.0 2 3.3 3.3 85.2 8 13.1 13.1 98.4 1 1.6 1.6 100.0 100.0 Page 2

Assessment efforts do not have a clear focus. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 8.3 8.3 14 23.0 23.3 31.7 13 21.3 21.7 53.3 5 8.2 8.3 61.7 17 27.9 28.3 90.0 6 9.8 10.0 100.0 60 98.4 100.0 1 1.6 Assessment is a "necessary evil" in higher education. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 3 4.9 5.0 5.0 17 27.9 28.3 33.3 8 13.1 13.3 46.7 8 13.1 13.3 60.0 17 27.9 28.3 88.3 7 11.5 11.7 100.0 60 98.4 100.0 1 1.6 Assessment is conducted based on the whims of the people in charge. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 6 9.8 10.0 10.0 10 16.4 16.7 26.7 6 9.8 10.0 36.7 7 11.5 11.7 48.3 20 32.8 33.3 81.7 11 18.0 18.3 100.0 60 98.4 100.0 1 1.6 Page 3

Discussions about student learning are at the heart of my institution's assessment effort. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 14 23.0 23.0 23.0 22 36.1 36.1 59.0 12 19.7 19.7 78.7 5 8.2 8.2 86.9 5 8.2 8.2 95.1 3 4.9 4.9 100.0 100.0 Assessment processes yield evidence of my institution's effectiveness. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 9 14.8 14.8 14.8 22 36.1 36.1 50.8 16 26.2 26.2 77.0 5 8.2 8.2 85.2 6 9.8 9.8 95.1 3 4.9 4.9 100.0 100.0 Please complete the following sentence with the single most appropriate response. " is the primary reason assessment is conducted at my institution." Other Access to financial resources Tradition Improving student learning Compliance with governmental mandates Accreditation Accountability Frequency 2 3.3 3.3 3.3 4 6.6 6.7 10.0 1 1.6 1.7 11.7 24 39.3 40.0 51.7 7 11.5 11.7 63.3 13 21.3 21.7 85.0 9 14.8 15.0 100.0 60 98.4 100.0 1 1.6 Page 4

It is clear who is ultimately in charge of assessment. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 7 11.5 12.7 12.7 17 27.9 30.9 43.6 21 34.4 38.2 81.8 2 3.3 3.6 85.5 4 6.6 7.3 92.7 4 6.6 7.3 100.0 55 90.2 100.0 6 9.8 Faculty are in charge of assessment at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 7 11.5 12.7 12.7 15 24.6 27.3 40.0 9 14.8 16.4 56.4 8 13.1 14.5 70.9 10 16.4 18.2 89.1 6 9.8 10.9 100.0 55 90.2 100.0 6 9.8 Senior leaders (i.e. President or Provost) have made clear their expectations regarding assessment. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 7.5 7.5 12 19.7 22.6 30.2 21 34.4 39.6 69.8 5 8.2 9.4 79.2 9 14.8 17.0 96.2 2 3.3 3.8 100.0 53 86.9 100.0 8 13.1 Page 5

I can name the office at my institution that leads student assessment efforts for accreditation purposes. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 17 27.9 30.9 30.9 14 23.0 25.5 56.4 4 6.6 7.3 63.6 5 8.2 9.1 72.7 13 21.3 23.6 96.4 2 3.3 3.6 100.0 55 90.2 100.0 6 9.8 I can name the office at my institution that leads assessment efforts for student learning. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 11 18.0 20.0 20.0 12 19.7 21.8 41.8 9 14.8 16.4 58.2 6 9.8 10.9 69.1 14 23.0 25.5 94.5 3 4.9 5.5 100.0 55 90.2 100.0 6 9.8 Assessment is emphasized as part of the organizational culture. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 11 18.0 22.4 22.4 15 24.6 30.6 53.1 15 24.6 30.6 83.7 4 6.6 8.2 91.8 2 3.3 4.1 95.9 2 3.3 4.1 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Page 6

There is no systematic approach to assessment at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 3 4.9 6.1 6.1 9 14.8 18.4 24.5 6 9.8 12.2 36.7 6 9.8 12.2 49.0 17 27.9 34.7 83.7 8 13.1 16.3 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Assessment is primarily the responsibility of faculty members. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 8 13.1 16.3 16.3 21 34.4 42.9 59.2 7 11.5 14.3 73.5 5 8.2 10.2 83.7 6 9.8 12.2 95.9 2 3.3 4.1 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Assessment is primarily the responsibility of administrators. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.0 2.0 4 6.6 8.2 10.2 18 29.5 36.7 46.9 7 11.5 14.3 61.2 14 23.0 28.6 89.8 5 8.2 10.2 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Page 7

My institution is structured in a way that facilitates assessment practices focused on improved student learning. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 10 16.4 19.6 19.6 16 26.2 31.4 51.0 10 16.4 19.6 70.6 3 4.9 5.9 76.5 8 13.1 15.7 92.2 4 6.6 7.8 100.0 51 83.6 100.0 10 16.4 Assessment for accreditation purposes is prioritized above other assessment efforts. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 9 14.8 18.4 18.4 17 27.9 34.7 53.1 4 6.6 8.2 61.2 6 9.8 12.2 73.5 11 18.0 22.4 95.9 2 3.3 4.1 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 There are sufficient financial resources to make changes at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 8.2 8.2 12 19.7 24.5 32.7 12 19.7 24.5 57.1 11 18.0 22.4 79.6 6 9.8 12.2 91.8 4 6.6 8.2 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Page 8

A recommended change is more likely to be enacted if it is supported by assessment data. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 11 18.0 22.0 22.0 22 36.1 44.0 66.0 6 9.8 12.0 78.0 6 9.8 12.0 90.0 3 4.9 6.0 96.0 2 3.3 4.0 100.0 50 82.0 100.0 11 18.0 Assessment is an organized, coherent effort at my institution Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 10.2 10.2 19 31.1 38.8 49.0 10 16.4 20.4 69.4 5 8.2 10.2 79.6 6 9.8 12.2 91.8 4 6.6 8.2 100.0 49 80.3 100.0 12 19.7 Assessment results have no impact on resource allocations. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 2 3.3 4.4 4.4 3 4.9 6.7 11.1 12 19.7 26.7 37.8 12 19.7 26.7 64.4 15 24.6 33.3 97.8 1 1.6 2.2 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Page 9

Assessment results are regularly shared throughout my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 8.3 8.3 12 19.7 25.0 33.3 14 23.0 29.2 62.5 4 6.6 8.3 70.8 13 21.3 27.1 97.9 1 1.6 2.1 100.0 48 78.7 100.0 13 21.3 Official institutional communications encourage assessment of student learning Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 10.6 10.6 17 27.9 36.2 46.8 12 19.7 25.5 72.3 3 4.9 6.4 78.7 9 14.8 19.1 97.9 1 1.6 2.1 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Assessment results are NOT intended for distribution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.1 2.1 9 14.8 19.1 21.3 9 14.8 19.1 40.4 8 13.1 17.0 57.4 16 26.2 34.0 91.5 4 6.6 8.5 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Page 10

Student assessment results are NOT regularly shared. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 8.3 8.3 14 23.0 29.2 37.5 7 11.5 14.6 52.1 4 6.6 8.3 60.4 17 27.9 35.4 95.8 2 3.3 4.2 100.0 48 78.7 100.0 13 21.3 Assessment success stories are shared throughout my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 8 13.1 17.4 17.4 8 13.1 17.4 34.8 9 14.8 19.6 54.3 6 9.8 13.0 67.4 13 21.3 28.3 95.7 2 3.3 4.3 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Faculty consistently receive assessment data from administrators. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.1 2.1 11 18.0 23.4 25.5 8 13.1 17.0 42.6 7 11.5 14.9 57.4 15 24.6 31.9 89.4 5 8.2 10.6 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Page 11

Assessment results are available from administrators by request. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.2 2.2 20 32.8 44.4 46.7 14 23.0 31.1 77.8 4 6.6 8.9 86.7 5 8.2 11.1 97.8 1 1.6 2.2 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Assessment results are regularly requested by colleagues at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.3 2.3 9 14.8 20.5 22.7 11 18.0 25.0 47.7 11 18.0 25.0 72.7 11 18.0 25.0 97.7 1 1.6 2.3 100.0 44 72.1 100.0 17 27.9 Communication of assessment results has been effective. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 2 3.3 4.3 4.3 12 19.7 26.1 30.4 9 14.8 19.6 50.0 10 16.4 21.7 71.7 6 9.8 13.0 84.8 7 11.5 15.2 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Page 12

Decisions are made using assessment data. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 6 9.8 13.0 13.0 22 36.1 47.8 60.9 11 18.0 23.9 84.8 3 4.9 6.5 91.3 2 3.3 4.3 95.7 2 3.3 4.3 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Assessment results are used to scare faculty into compliance with what the administration wants. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 3 4.9 6.4 6.4 5 8.2 10.6 17.0 3 4.9 6.4 23.4 4 6.6 8.5 31.9 25 41.0 53.2 85.1 7 11.5 14.9 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Assessment data are regularly used in official institutional communications (e.g., speeches, publications, etc.). Only Slightly Frequency 2 3.3 4.5 4.5 15 24.6 34.1 38.6 13 21.3 29.5 68.2 4 6.6 9.1 77.3 10 16.4 22.7 100.0 44 72.1 100.0 17 27.9 Page 13

Assessment data are used to identify the extent to which student learning outcomes are met. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 11.1 11.1 18 29.5 40.0 51.1 8 13.1 17.8 68.9 6 9.8 13.3 82.2 7 11.5 15.6 97.8 1 1.6 2.2 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Assessment results are used for improvement. Only Slightly Frequency 4 6.6 8.5 8.5 23 37.7 48.9 57.4 13 21.3 27.7 85.1 3 4.9 6.4 91.5 4 6.6 8.5 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Administrators use assessment to punish faculty members. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.1 2.1 3 4.9 6.4 8.5 5 8.2 10.6 19.1 5 8.2 10.6 29.8 23 37.7 48.9 78.7 10 16.4 21.3 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Page 14

Assessment results are criticized for going nowhere (i.e., not leading to change). Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 5 8.2 11.4 11.4 4 6.6 9.1 20.5 16 26.2 36.4 56.8 5 8.2 11.4 68.2 10 16.4 22.7 90.9 4 6.6 9.1 100.0 44 72.1 100.0 17 27.9 There is pressure to reveal only positive results from assessment efforts. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 3 4.9 6.5 6.5 2 3.3 4.3 10.9 8 13.1 17.4 28.3 9 14.8 19.6 47.8 16 26.2 34.8 82.6 8 13.1 17.4 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Senior leaders (i.e. president, provost, vice presidents) use assessment results in public ways (i.e., speeches, marketing efforts, media stories, etc). Only Slightly Frequency 6 9.8 14.3 14.3 14 23.0 33.3 47.6 15 24.6 35.7 83.3 3 4.9 7.1 90.5 4 6.6 9.5 100.0 42 68.9 100.0 19 31.1 Page 15

Change occurs more readily when supported by assessment results. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 10 16.4 22.7 22.7 13 21.3 29.5 52.3 15 24.6 34.1 86.4 1 1.6 2.3 88.6 4 6.6 9.1 97.7 1 1.6 2.3 100.0 44 72.1 100.0 17 27.9 The majority of colleagues at my institution see assessment as focused on compliance requirements. Only Slightly Frequency 4 6.6 8.7 8.7 13 21.3 28.3 37.0 18 29.5 39.1 76.1 4 6.6 8.7 84.8 7 11.5 15.2 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 The majority of my colleagues at my institution are afraid of assessment. Only Slightly Frequency 1 1.6 2.2 2.2 8 13.1 17.8 20.0 6 9.8 13.3 33.3 7 11.5 15.6 48.9 23 37.7 51.1 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Page 16

The majority of colleagues at my institution see assessment as improving student learning Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 2 3.3 4.3 4.3 17 27.9 37.0 41.3 12 19.7 26.1 67.4 6 9.8 13.0 80.4 5 8.2 10.9 91.3 4 6.6 8.7 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 I am not convinced that assessment is necessary. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 8.7 8.7 3 4.9 6.5 15.2 7 11.5 15.2 30.4 4 6.6 8.7 39.1 16 26.2 34.8 73.9 12 19.7 26.1 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 The majority of administrators genuinely believe assessment supports student learning at my institution. Only Slightly Frequency 8 13.1 17.4 17.4 24 39.3 52.2 69.6 10 16.4 21.7 91.3 2 3.3 4.3 95.7 2 3.3 4.3 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Page 17

It is difficult to get the majority of administrators to support assessment-based improvement efforts. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 8.9 8.9 8 13.1 17.8 26.7 7 11.5 15.6 42.2 21 34.4 46.7 88.9 5 8.2 11.1 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 I engage in assessment because I am afraid of what will happen if I do not. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 2 3.3 4.3 4.3 3 4.9 6.5 10.9 5 8.2 10.9 21.7 3 4.9 6.5 28.3 18 29.5 39.1 67.4 15 24.6 32.6 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Assessment is perceived as a punishment (i.e., something I regret being assigned) Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 1 1.6 2.2 2.2 2 3.3 4.4 6.7 3 4.9 6.7 13.3 9 14.8 20.0 33.3 14 23.0 31.1 64.4 16 26.2 35.6 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Page 18

Assessment is a threat to academic freedom. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 3 4.9 6.8 6.8 3 4.9 6.8 13.6 4 6.6 9.1 22.7 7 11.5 15.9 38.6 15 24.6 34.1 72.7 12 19.7 27.3 100.0 44 72.1 100.0 17 27.9 Assessment processes are clearly understood by a majority of administrators at my institution. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 4 6.6 9.3 9.3 17 27.9 39.5 48.8 10 16.4 23.3 72.1 7 11.5 16.3 88.4 4 6.6 9.3 97.7 1 1.6 2.3 100.0 43 70.5 100.0 18 29.5 The majority of administrators are eager to work with faculty. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 7 11.5 14.9 14.9 24 39.3 51.1 66.0 8 13.1 17.0 83.0 3 4.9 6.4 89.4 3 4.9 6.4 95.7 2 3.3 4.3 100.0 47 77.0 100.0 14 23.0 Page 19

The majority of administrators do not care about assessment. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 2 3.3 4.4 4.4 4 6.6 8.9 13.3 5 8.2 11.1 24.4 24 39.3 53.3 77.8 10 16.4 22.2 100.0 45 73.8 100.0 16 26.2 Assessment is a "good thing" for my institution to do. Only Slightly Strongly Frequency 11 18.0 23.9 23.9 23 37.7 50.0 73.9 10 16.4 21.7 95.7 1 1.6 2.2 97.8 1 1.6 2.2 100.0 46 75.4 100.0 15 24.6 Page 20