Frequency Distributions 2014 Administrators' Survey of Assessment Culture

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

2015 Faculty Survey of Assessment Culture

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

Inventory of Best Practices for Learning Support Centers in Higher Education

European Responsible Care Award Celanese Contractor Safety Improvements. About Celanese

Employee Compensation 2014 Band 60, ,999.99

INTERNET ACCESS GOALS AND PLANS

Employee Compensation 2015 Band 60, ,999.99

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

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

Motorcycle Safety Program Assessments

NEW GRADUATE PROGRAM

NSSE 2017 U.S. Summary Frequencies

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

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

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

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

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

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

2013 Revised Alabama Course of Study English Language Arts Grade 3

Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent

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

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

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core 2013

Hours of Service (HOS)

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

DISCLAIMER. This presentation is for informational purposes only. The content is point-in-time information, subject to revision

NewsTrain Host Guide 2018

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

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

Instructionally Relevant Alternate Assessments for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities

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

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

University of Alabama Faculty Climate Survey

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

Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Parking Issues Trenton Downtown Parking Policy and Sidewalk Design Standards E.S. Page 1 Final Report 2008

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

Breaking News English.com Ready-to-Use English Lessons by Sean Banville

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

AAA ON THE ISSUES

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

Consultative meeting (OV)

AAA ON THE ISSUES

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

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

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

Arapahoe Community College Castle Rock Campus Assessment Plan Data

HATBORO-HORSHAM HIGH SCHOOL PARKING PROCEDURES AND ENFORCEMENT GUIDELINES

Employee Compensation 2016 Band 60, ,999.99

Final Administrative Decision

Site Technology Device Management and Theft Prevention Plan

Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts Grade 3

Powertrain Acceptance & Consumer Engagement Study. Chrysler Powertrain Research March

Road Traffic Injury in Tanzania: Development of a Local Government Road Safety Programme

The Software Supply Chain Today

Brain on Board: From safety features to driverless cars

FAMU Completers Satisfaction Survey Results 2010

Nissan to make future New York taxis

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

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

SDG&E Electric Vehicle activities

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core Grade 6, 2013

Advanced RiderCourse SportBike Techniques Frequently Asked Questions. 1. What is the MSF Advanced RiderCourse SportBike Techniques (ARC-ST) course?

Certificate in a vocational program

AEP Utilities Presentation

Knowledge and the PACC project: Building, sharing, learning

Overview of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001

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

Plattsburgh Downtown Parking Study

LSC Council Meeting. Peter Saulson LIGO-G Z

PROMOTING THE UPTAKE OF ELECTRIC AND OTHER LOW EMISSION VEHICLES

MOTORCYCLE SAFETY. FY 14 Motorcycle Safety Assessment

Strategy for Promoting Centers of Excellence (CoE) Activities

The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Purpose and Progress. Tim Stephenson AarhusKarlshamn UK. May 2006

Reading Standards for the Archdiocese of Detroit Grade 1

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

Motor Vehicle Law. Motor Vehicle Law approved. (2015, Union Parliament Law No. 55) (7 September 2015)

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

School bus safety behaviours and responsibilities

City of Minnetonka Maximum Parking Regulations Urban GIS. Group Members Brad Johnston Mark Kelley Jonathan Winge

Georgia Southern University Course Evaluations Page 1

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

Car Sharing at a. with great results.

Robotics. BEGINNERS: Mondays 4:00 to 5:15 PM April 10 to June 12 LEVEL 3: Thursdays 4:00 to 5:15 PM April 20 to June 8

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

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

Appendix C. Parking Strategies

VIDEO-BASED SAFETY: FACTS, STATS AND IMPACT

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

Sponsorship Packet 2016

BRANDON POLICE SERVICE th Street Brandon, Manitoba R7A 6Z3 Telephone: (204)

Policy Number Utility Golf Cart Policy

Decision on Merced Irrigation District Transition Agreement

Scholastic s Early Childhood Program Correlated to the Minnesota Pre-K Standards

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

Claudette Colvin: Twice Toward Justice On Task Questions Chapters 1-3

Propeller Palooza! A classroom design challenge for students

Protecting Occupants

Evaluating Stakeholder Engagement

Transcription:

Frequency Distributions 2014 Administrators' Survey of Assessment Culture Copyright- 2014 Matthew B. Fuller. DRAFT results provided below are for discusison purposes only. Questions may be different than stat ed below. Note: Categories with no responses do not appear in the basic output below. Unless otherw ise noted, most responses were collected on a 6 point scale where 6= Strongly, 5= A gree, 4= Only Slightly/Somewhat, 3= Only Slightly/, 2=, 1= Stro ngly. PURPOSE [Assessment is expected as part of my institution's continuous improvement process.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 1.5.5.5 2 1.0 1.0 1.4 17 8.2 8.2 9.7 82 39.6 39.6 49.3 105 50.7 50.7 100.0 100.0 PURPOSE [Assessment is an exercise primarily for compliance purposes.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 21 10.1 10.2 10.2 54 26.1 26.3 36.6 35 16.9 17.1 53.7 52 25.1 25.4 79.0 28 13.5 13.7 92.7 15 7.2 7.3 100.0 205 99.0 100.0 2 1.0 Page 1

PURPOSE [The purpose of assessment depends largely on who is asking for assessment results.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 9 4.3 4.4 4.4 42 20.3 20.6 25.0 22 10.6 10.8 35.8 52 25.1 25.5 61.3 60 29.0 29.4 90.7 19 9.2 9.3 100.0 204 98.6 100.0 3 1.4 PURPOSE [The purpose of assessment is clearly understood at my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 1.9 1.9 11 5.3 5.3 7.2 32 15.5 15.5 22.7 82 39.6 39.6 62.3 61 29.5 29.5 91.8 17 8.2 8.2 100.0 100.0 PURPOSE [Assessment for accreditation purposes is prioritized above other assessment efforts.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 18 8.7 8.7 9.7 34 16.4 16.4 26.1 54 26.1 26.1 52.2 65 31.4 31.4 83.6 34 16.4 16.4 100.0 100.0 Page 2

PURPOSE [Assessment is emphasized as part of the institutional culture.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 1.9 1.9 8 3.9 3.9 5.8 24 11.6 11.6 17.4 64 30.9 30.9 48.3 76 36.7 36.7 85.0 31 15.0 15.0 100.0 100.0 PURPOSE [Assessment efforts do not have a clear focus.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 24 11.6 11.7 11.7 58 28.0 28.3 40.0 57 27.5 27.8 67.8 45 21.7 22.0 89.8 16 7.7 7.8 97.6 5 2.4 2.4 100.0 205 99.0 100.0 2 1.0 PURPOSE [Assessment is conducted based on the whims of the people in charge.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 54 26.1 26.2 26.2 86 41.5 41.7 68.0 30 14.5 14.6 82.5 23 11.1 11.2 93.7 11 5.3 5.3 99.0 2 1.0 1.0 100.0 206 99.5 100.0 1.5 Page 3

PURPOSE [Discussions about student learning are at the heart of my institution's assessment effort.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 1.5.5.5 12 5.8 5.9 6.3 15 7.2 7.3 13.7 57 27.5 27.8 41.5 89 43.0 43.4 84.9 31 15.0 15.1 100.0 205 99.0 100.0 2 1.0 PURPOSE [Assessment processes yield evidence of my institution's effectiveness.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 1.5.5.5 5 2.4 2.4 2.9 16 7.7 7.8 10.7 56 27.1 27.2 37.9 95 45.9 46.1 84.0 33 15.9 16.0 100.0 206 99.5 100.0 1.5 PURPOSE [My institution is more effective at its mission because of assessment.] Somewhat Strongly 9 4.3 4.4 4.4 23 11.1 11.2 15.5 64 30.9 31.1 46.6 78 37.7 37.9 84.5 32 15.5 15.5 100.0 206 99.5 100.0 1.5 Page 4

PURPOSE [Students learn better because of assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 5 2.4 2.4 3.4 10 4.8 4.9 8.3 60 29.0 29.1 37.4 83 40.1 40.3 77.7 46 22.2 22.3 100.0 206 99.5 100.0 1.5 FILL_PURPOSE Accountability Accreditation Compliance with governmental mandates Improving student learning Other Tradition 31 15.0 15.0 15.0 78 37.7 37.7 52.7 6 2.9 2.9 55.6 80 38.6 38.6 94.2 10 4.8 4.8 99.0 2 1.0 1.0 100.0 100.0 Page 5

FILL_PURPOSE [Other] A combination of Improvement and Accountability purposes. Both accreditation and compliance with governmental mandates Continuous Improvement Delivering on our value proposition Improvement Improving our institution Improving student learning and institutional processes Institutional Effectiveness Without a clear focus, each of these 198 95.7 95.7 95.7 1.5.5 96.1 1.5.5 96.6 1.5.5 97.1 1.5.5 97.6 1.5.5 98.1 1.5.5 98.6 1.5.5 99.0 1.5.5 99.5 1.5.5 100.0 100.0 LEADING [It is clear who is ultimately in charge of assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 2.0 2.0 8 3.9 4.0 6.1 11 5.3 5.6 11.6 47 22.7 23.7 35.4 88 42.5 44.4 79.8 40 19.3 20.2 100.0 198 95.7 100.0 9 4.3 Page 6

LEADING [Senior leaders (i.e. President or Provost) have made clear their expectations regarding assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 9 4.3 4.5 4.5 16 7.7 8.0 12.4 8 3.9 4.0 16.4 55 26.6 27.4 43.8 72 34.8 35.8 79.6 41 19.8 20.4 100.0 201 97.1 100.0 6 2.9 LEADING [I can name the office at my institution that leads student assessment efforts for accreditation purposes. ] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 3 1.4 1.5 1.5 3 1.4 1.5 3.0 1.5.5 3.5 5 2.4 2.5 6.0 56 27.1 28.1 34.2 131 63.3 65.8 100.0 199 96.1 100.0 8 3.9 Page 7

LEADING [I can name the office at my institution that leads assessment efforts for student learning.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 8 3.9 4.0 5.0 1.5.5 5.5 13 6.3 6.5 12.0 60 29.0 30.0 42.0 116 56.0 58.0 100.0 200 96.6 100.0 7 3.4 LEADING [Assessment is primarily the responsibility of administrators.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 37 17.9 18.6 18.6 76 36.7 38.2 56.8 21 10.1 10.6 67.3 34 16.4 17.1 84.4 22 10.6 11.1 95.5 9 4.3 4.5 100.0 199 96.1 100.0 8 3.9 LEADING [Assessment is primarily the responsibility of faculty members.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.5 2.5 28 13.5 13.9 16.4 17 8.2 8.5 24.9 39 18.8 19.4 44.3 72 34.8 35.8 80.1 40 19.3 19.9 100.0 201 97.1 100.0 6 2.9 Page 8

LEADING [Official institutional communications encourage assessment of student learning.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 6 2.9 3.0 3.0 21 10.1 10.7 13.7 13 6.3 6.6 20.3 52 25.1 26.4 46.7 77 37.2 39.1 85.8 28 13.5 14.2 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 LEADING [Assessments of programs are typically connected to student learning.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 1.5.5.5 7 3.4 3.5 4.0 6 2.9 3.0 7.0 28 13.5 14.0 21.0 115 55.6 57.5 78.5 43 20.8 21.5 100.0 200 96.6 100.0 7 3.4 LEADING [Assessment is an organized, coherent effort at my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 2.0 2.0 18 8.7 9.0 11.0 10 4.8 5.0 16.0 41 19.8 20.5 36.5 89 43.0 44.5 81.0 38 18.4 19.0 100.0 200 96.6 100.0 7 3.4 Page 9

LEADING [Assessment results are available to faculty by request.] Somewhat Strongly 9 4.3 4.5 4.5 14 6.8 7.0 11.6 24 11.6 12.1 23.6 79 38.2 39.7 63.3 73 35.3 36.7 100.0 199 96.1 100.0 8 3.9 LEADING [My institution is structured in a way that facilitates assessment practices focused on improved student learning.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 2.0 2.0 16 7.7 8.1 10.1 8 3.9 4.0 14.1 47 22.7 23.7 37.9 92 44.4 46.5 84.3 31 15.0 15.7 100.0 198 95.7 100.0 9 4.3 LEADING [There is no systematic approach to assessment at my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 67 32.4 33.7 33.7 75 36.2 37.7 71.4 22 10.6 11.1 82.4 15 7.2 7.5 89.9 14 6.8 7.0 97.0 6 2.9 3.0 100.0 199 96.1 100.0 8 3.9 Page 10

LEADING [There is a common language for engaging in assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 12 5.8 6.0 7.0 23 11.1 11.5 18.5 44 21.3 22.0 40.5 93 44.9 46.5 87.0 26 12.6 13.0 100.0 200 96.6 100.0 7 3.4 LEADING [Budgetary decisions are tied to assessment results.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 31 15.0 15.6 15.6 49 23.7 24.6 40.2 13 6.3 6.5 46.7 54 26.1 27.1 73.9 45 21.7 22.6 96.5 7 3.4 3.5 100.0 199 96.1 100.0 8 3.9 SHARING [Assessment results are regularly shared throughout my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.5 2.5 20 9.7 10.1 12.6 10 4.8 5.1 17.7 59 28.5 29.8 47.5 76 36.7 38.4 85.9 28 13.5 14.1 100.0 198 95.7 100.0 9 4.3 Page 11

SHARING [Assessment results are not intended for distribution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 52 25.1 26.8 26.8 79 38.2 40.7 67.5 23 11.1 11.9 79.4 22 10.6 11.3 90.7 14 6.8 7.2 97.9 4 1.9 2.1 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 SHARING [Student assessment results are not regularly shared. ] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 27 13.0 13.7 13.7 70 33.8 35.5 49.2 29 14.0 14.7 64.0 33 15.9 16.8 80.7 32 15.5 16.2 97.0 6 2.9 3.0 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 SHARING [Assessment success stories are formally shared throughout my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 8 3.9 4.1 4.1 42 20.3 21.4 25.5 22 10.6 11.2 36.7 57 27.5 29.1 65.8 56 27.1 28.6 94.4 11 5.3 5.6 100.0 196 94.7 100.0 11 5.3 Page 12

SHARING [Administrators consistently share assessment data with faculty members.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 7 3.4 3.6 3.6 28 13.5 14.4 18.0 21 10.1 10.8 28.9 56 27.1 28.9 57.7 66 31.9 34.0 91.8 16 7.7 8.2 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 SHARING [Institutional constituents request assessment results.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 7 3.4 3.6 3.6 33 15.9 17.2 20.8 24 11.6 12.5 33.3 43 20.8 22.4 55.7 74 35.7 38.5 94.3 11 5.3 5.7 100.0 192 92.8 100.0 15 7.2 SHARING [The way we speak about assessment at my institution inspires me to get involved in it.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.6 2.6 26 12.6 13.8 16.4 15 7.2 7.9 24.3 45 21.7 23.8 48.1 75 36.2 39.7 87.8 23 11.1 12.2 100.0 189 91.3 100.0 18 8.7 Page 13

SHARING [Colleagues at my institution speak positively of assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 3 1.4 1.5 1.5 22 10.6 11.2 12.8 20 9.7 10.2 23.0 78 37.7 39.8 62.8 63 30.4 32.1 94.9 10 4.8 5.1 100.0 196 94.7 100.0 11 5.3 SHARING [Senior leaders speak favorably of assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 8 3.9 4.1 4.1 13 6.3 6.6 10.7 9 4.3 4.6 15.3 46 22.2 23.5 38.8 90 43.5 45.9 84.7 30 14.5 15.3 100.0 196 94.7 100.0 11 5.3 USE [Decisions are made using assessment data.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.5 2.5 17 8.2 8.6 11.2 10 4.8 5.1 16.2 50 24.2 25.4 41.6 92 44.4 46.7 88.3 23 11.1 11.7 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 Page 14

USE [Assessment results are used to scare employees into compliance with what the administration wants.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 69 33.3 35.0 35.0 89 43.0 45.2 80.2 13 6.3 6.6 86.8 20 9.7 10.2 97.0 5 2.4 2.5 99.5 1.5.5 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 USE [Assessment data are regularly used in official institutional communications (e.g., speeches, publications, etc.).] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 13 6.3 6.7 6.7 37 17.9 19.0 25.6 23 11.1 11.8 37.4 59 28.5 30.3 67.7 50 24.2 25.6 93.3 13 6.3 6.7 100.0 195 94.2 100.0 12 5.8 Page 15

USE [Assessment data are used to identify to what extent student learning outcomes are met.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 7 3.4 3.6 3.6 13 6.3 6.6 10.2 3 1.4 1.5 11.7 39 18.8 19.8 31.5 97 46.9 49.2 80.7 38 18.4 19.3 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 USE [Assessment results are used for improvement.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 3 1.4 1.5 1.5 7 3.4 3.6 5.1 6 2.9 3.0 8.1 41 19.8 20.8 28.9 106 51.2 53.8 82.7 34 16.4 17.3 100.0 197 95.2 100.0 10 4.8 USE [Administrators use assessment to punish faculty members.] Strongly Somewhat 124 59.9 64.2 64.2 58 28.0 30.1 94.3 7 3.4 3.6 97.9 3 1.4 1.6 99.5 1.5.5 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 Page 16

USE [Assessment results are criticized for going nowhere (i.e., not leading to change).] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 23 11.1 12.0 12.0 61 29.5 31.9 44.0 30 14.5 15.7 59.7 48 23.2 25.1 84.8 22 10.6 11.5 96.3 7 3.4 3.7 100.0 191 92.3 100.0 16 7.7 USE [There is pressure to reveal only positive results from assessment efforts.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 58 28.0 29.6 29.6 73 35.3 37.2 66.8 23 11.1 11.7 78.6 29 14.0 14.8 93.4 9 4.3 4.6 98.0 4 1.9 2.0 100.0 196 94.7 100.0 11 5.3 USE [Senior leaders (i.e. president, provost, vice presidents) use assessment results in public ways (i.e., speeches, marketing efforts, media stories, etc). ] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 13 6.3 6.7 6.7 40 19.3 20.7 27.5 23 11.1 11.9 39.4 50 24.2 25.9 65.3 53 25.6 27.5 92.7 14 6.8 7.3 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 Page 17

USE [Change occurs more readily when supported by assessment results. ] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 6 2.9 3.1 3.1 12 5.8 6.2 9.2 11 5.3 5.6 14.9 37 17.9 19.0 33.8 90 43.5 46.2 80.0 39 18.8 20.0 100.0 195 94.2 100.0 12 5.8 ADMIN [The majority of colleagues at my institution perceive assessment is focused on compliance requirements.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 3 1.4 1.6 1.6 27 13.0 14.0 15.5 18 8.7 9.3 24.9 54 26.1 28.0 52.8 79 38.2 40.9 93.8 12 5.8 6.2 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 ADMIN [The majority of colleagues at my institution perceive assessment as improving student learning] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 2.1 2.1 11 5.3 5.7 7.7 15 7.2 7.7 15.5 86 41.5 44.3 59.8 69 33.3 35.6 95.4 9 4.3 4.6 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 Page 18

ADMIN [The majority of colleagues at my institution perceive assessment as improving student learning] ADMIN [If assessment was not required I would not be doing it.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 48 23.2 24.9 24.9 70 33.8 36.3 61.1 26 12.6 13.5 74.6 25 12.1 13.0 87.6 15 7.2 7.8 95.3 9 4.3 4.7 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 ADMIN [The majority of colleagues at my institution are afraid of assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 14 6.8 7.3 7.3 65 31.4 33.7 40.9 45 21.7 23.3 64.2 44 21.3 22.8 87.0 20 9.7 10.4 97.4 5 2.4 2.6 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 Page 19

ADMIN [The majority of faculty members are eager to work with administrators.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 12 5.8 6.3 6.3 25 12.1 13.2 19.5 35 16.9 18.4 37.9 66 31.9 34.7 72.6 48 23.2 25.3 97.9 4 1.9 2.1 100.0 190 91.8 100.0 17 8.2 ADMIN [I engage in assessment because I am afraid of what will happen if I do not.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 78 37.7 41.1 41.1 67 32.4 35.3 76.3 14 6.8 7.4 83.7 16 7.7 8.4 92.1 11 5.3 5.8 97.9 4 1.9 2.1 100.0 190 91.8 100.0 17 8.2 ADMIN [Assessment is a "necessary evil" in higher education.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 63 30.4 32.8 32.8 69 33.3 35.9 68.8 11 5.3 5.7 74.5 24 11.6 12.5 87.0 23 11.1 12.0 99.0 2 1.0 1.0 100.0 192 92.8 100.0 15 7.2 Page 20

ADMIN [It is difficult to get the majority of faculty members to support assessment-based improvement efforts.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 8 3.9 4.1 4.1 50 24.2 25.8 29.9 37 17.9 19.1 49.0 44 21.3 22.7 71.6 42 20.3 21.6 93.3 13 6.3 6.7 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 ADMIN [Assessment processes are clearly understood by a majority of the faculty members at my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.6 2.6 34 16.4 17.7 20.3 28 13.5 14.6 34.9 57 27.5 29.7 64.6 62 30.0 32.3 96.9 6 2.9 3.1 100.0 192 92.8 100.0 15 7.2 Page 21

ADMIN [I am not convinced that assessment is necessary. ] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 110 53.1 57.3 57.3 54 26.1 28.1 85.4 11 5.3 5.7 91.1 9 4.3 4.7 95.8 7 3.4 3.6 99.5 1.5.5 100.0 192 92.8 100.0 15 7.2 ADMIN [The majority of faculty members do not care about assessment.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 11 5.3 5.7 5.7 72 34.8 37.3 43.0 49 23.7 25.4 68.4 30 14.5 15.5 83.9 23 11.1 11.9 95.9 8 3.9 4.1 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 ADMIN [The majority of faculty members genuinely believe assessment supports student learning at my institution.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 5 2.4 2.6 2.6 17 8.2 8.8 11.4 28 13.5 14.5 25.9 69 33.3 35.8 61.7 68 32.9 35.2 96.9 6 2.9 3.1 100.0 193 93.2 100.0 14 6.8 Page 22

ADMIN [Assessment is a threat to academic freedom.] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 99 47.8 51.0 51.0 68 32.9 35.1 86.1 8 3.9 4.1 90.2 8 3.9 4.1 94.3 7 3.4 3.6 97.9 4 1.9 2.1 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 ADMIN [Assessment is perceived as a punishment (i.e., something I regret being assigned).] Strongly Somewhat Strongly 64 30.9 33.9 33.9 68 32.9 36.0 69.8 23 11.1 12.2 82.0 21 10.1 11.1 93.1 8 3.9 4.2 97.4 5 2.4 2.6 100.0 189 91.3 100.0 18 8.7 ADMIN [Assessment is a "good thing" for my institution to do.] Somewhat Strongly 4 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.5.5 2.6 16 7.7 8.2 10.8 84 40.6 43.3 54.1 89 43.0 45.9 100.0 194 93.7 100.0 13 6.3 Your license will expire in 30 days. Page 23