Self-Study Process Alerts

Self-Study Process Alerts OAI folks,

Don’t forget that you can set an “alert” on the Sharepoint “Spring Self-Studies Process” list, so you get emails that keep you up to date on changes to the list.  Here is a sample (it may appear slightly shrunk due to the way it was captured):

I have my alert set so it is delivered once a day with all the day’s changes;  you can have immediate alerts on each change if you wish.

To set an alert,
go to the current OAITeam site: the top page near the right edge, click on “Welcome ” to drop down a menu.Select “My Settings” from the Menu.  You will see your profile page.From the blue toolbar about 1 inch below the top of the page, click on “My Alerts”.  You will see the “My Alerts on this Site” page. From the blue toolbar, click on “Add Alert”.  You will see the “New Alert” page.From the libraries and lists, select “Spring Self-Studies Process”.  Click “next” to see the alert settings page.Choose your settings and click “OK”.

Note that because this list is based on the “Task” list template, you will get an email when a task is assigned to you in any case.

— Joshua

Process for creating May 17 responses to programs

I am still finalizing a few details, but I know several of you are in position to begin writing your response to programs, so here is a start.

Documents and templates you need are in the left menu “Site Hierarchy/Documents library” of the site where we are working

As part of Process Actions Steps 7 & 8, the OAI Contact should:

More on what I think the remaining steps are:

  • Josh and I are still working on how you will record the  reconciled rater scores
  • Post the completed Response to Program in the AWE folder along side the program’s self study
  • Set the status of the Process Actions to alert Ashley to read the draft.
  • When Gary finishes his review, use the OAI Email template to send comments back to programs

Assessment Report Card for Provost’s Council (May 2010)

We might anticipate response to this report to be presented to the Provost’s council by the Vice Provost tomorrow.

attached file Assessment Report Card 5-10-10

Flexing the May Report deadline

Hi [Program Point],
We discussed the update on your recent assessment meeting, which was a great start.  Your OAI contact also shared that you may be feeling a bit stressed by the May timeline, so I want to say we’d rather keep working together to get a pithy, focused, and clear document that reflects the real* work you are doing.  So if you need more time and if you are open to the ongoing collaboration, when the results start coming in we’re happy to help pull together a report ready outline, find some time to sit down with you, and help get the report into shape.  If that goes into June or so, that’s fine on this end.
Let me know.


*”real” is the operative word that makes flexibility possible.
Dr. Gary R. Brown, Director
The Office of Assessment and Innovation
Washington State University
509 335-1352
509 335-1362 (fax)

MCC site permissions

FW: MCC site permissions Continue progress in building our capacity and refining our work

—— Forwarded Message
From: Joshua Yeidel
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 12:12:04 -0700


During the process of building the report for NWCCU 2009, we discovered that it is not a good idea to link sites to assessment reports.  There are three issues we encountered:

Link rot.  Sites move, but all the inbound links aren’t necessarily changed (or, in the case of links in PDF’s, they are not changeable).

Page updates.  People don’t necessarily want to freeze their sites just because they included them in a report, but the updated site may not say or show the same information that made it relevant to the report.

Permissions.  The report is a showcase, but the site may not be (or may not always be).  If part of the site is public and part not, there is increased chance of misunderstandings and errors causing confidential information to become public.

Audience focus.  Websites often have many functions which can be distracting or confusing when the reader is interested in an exhibit of a very particular point.

I recommend that departments wishing to include web pages as evidence convert the pages to PDF and include them as files in the Exhibits folder. This avoids all of the issues above.

On Windows systems, programs such as PDFCreator and CutePDF (both free) can be used to “print” any printable document (including a web page as viewed in a browser) to a PDF file.  On Mac OS X, there is a built-in “Save as PDF…” command in the “PDF” drop-down menu in the Print dialog box.

We hope to have the library for May reports available today or tomorrow.

On another topic:  per-document logins are not affected by “contribute” vs. “read-only” permissions.  The issue and the workaround are documented here:

— Joshua

On 5/4/10 10:07 AM, “Green, Kimberly” wrote:


MCC is going to link their sharepoint site in their assessment report to OAI.  Who will be able to see it?

Could you add the oai ad group? (I think it needs to be contribute, bc with just read permissions a person has to log in every darn time they want to read a doc.)

And could you add me as an owner, since I’m the point person there?

Or is there a better way?   (I expect that History will have a similar need re reporting.)


—— End of Forwarded Message

Draft note to Deans/Chairs to Come From Provost

Draft note to Deans/Chairs


Here’s our first draft.  With your modifications, I hope we can entice a few hold outs to join in the fun.

Deans and Chairs

WSU is preparing its response to NWCCU’s Final Report. As part of that effort, the Office of Assessment and Innovation is working with all undergraduate programs to collect self-studies on program-level assessment activities. OAI has provided feedback to programs who submitted draft self-studies in December, and my office also used that preliminary information as part of a report to the HEC Board in March.

I am reminding you of OAI’s deadline of May 17 for a revised self-study, including the Action Plan and Evidence section which was not required last December. I am asking you to ensure that your program provides a self-study in May, using guidelines found on the website, or that your program is in contact with OAI to make other arrangements.

Timely delivery of self-studies will help OAI by allowing the time necessary to review and compile data from all programs for the report that WSU must provide to NWCCU in the Fall of 2010. My office is also working with OAI to develop a mechanism where the information you provide in these self-studies can be used to also meet many of the requirements of the HEC Board’s Annual Program Review. OAI, Institutional Research and my office are working to streamline as much of this reporting as possible.

College Liaisons, Program Points and OAI Contacts can all be found here

NWCCU’s Final Report can be found on the website.


Assessment design is messy: challenges to cooordinating flexible and useful assessment for a college and its programs

Assessment planning, designing, and implementing is a messy process, as are most authentic, responsive endeavors that involve and engage many people from a variety of roles and vantage points.   Different people and programs have different concerns and genuine questions.

What’s the relationship between college and program assessment? Student learning goals identified by a college and by its programs are at the heart of assessing student learning and planning useful and coordinated assessment activities. Many challenges to designing  a coordinated, yet flexible assessment plan that balances multiple considerations.

OAI is addressing this question now with one WSU college, Spring 2010:

From OAI contact to a program head:

I’ll briefly summarize  a) assessment efforts at WSU, b) what I understand assessment efforts in one college, c) what I understand is on the table now for next steps, and d) my role as your OAI contact, as well as OAI’s role.

Assessment efforts at WSU: college-level and program-level

The current efforts for systematic assessment at WSU include two different approaches.

In some colleges, efforts are starting primarily at the program level, including developing an assessment plan, student learning goals, rubrics/tools, measures, and processes.  This approach can create assessment that’s immediately meaningful and useful to a program — but it also brings significant challenges in terms of “rolling up” results into something coherent at the college level.   Piecemeal efforts, dozens of unaligned rubrics and measures, there is a great deal needed to make that useful at the college (and institutional) level.

In other colleges, assessment efforts have been coordinated at the school or college level.  This approach identifies common student learning goals across programs, and seeks to develop common rubrics/tools, measures and processes for assessment.  This approach can provide useful assessment results at the college level, with aligned measures (such as course evaluations, senior exit surveys, alumni surveys, etc.) providing complementary data.  It also brings the opposite challenge — how to build in flexibility and give adequate agency at the program level so that programs can identify and focus on gathering useful assessment data that interests and informs them to guide ongoing improvement in learning and teaching.

Summary of your college assessment efforts to date (as I understand them, primarily involving OAI/CTLT)

For several years … the college has invested time and effort in a developing, piloting and refining a college-wide rubric, with input from faculty in the various areas, in collaboration with OAI/CTLT.  The assessment team, in consultation with OAI/CTLT, adapted WSU’s Critical and Integrated Thinking Rubric, and revised it with input from various faculty  Over two semesters, the rubric has been piloted and refined by assessing student work from five different courses in the college.

The assessment team has also developed and piloted a senior exit survey which aligns with the rubric and has started drafting an alumni survey that is similarly aligned.

Last semester, the Dean requested two faculty to draft student learning goals for the college, in alignment with WSU’s Six Learning Goals of the Baccalaureate. This was done independent from work by the assessment team.

In February 2010, OAI helped map the college rubric to these new learning goals and WSU’s Big 6, including adding another dimension for specialty (to be developed by each program).

Next steps

In March 2010, faculty in one program brought up questions about the purpose of assessment in their area, the rubric, and the college’s new student learning goals and performance criteria created last semester.   These raise important questions about how to balance program agency and assessment needs with college-level needs, including:

  • What is the relationship between the new student learning goals and performance criteria, and the rubric developed over the past two years, the complementary measures and data?
  • In the future, how does the college want to balance college level assessment and program level assessment for a coherent and useful overall assessment effort?

These questions and their answers represent an important conversation among key players in the college, faculty and leadership.

From an assessment standpoint, there is no fixed path ahead.  Rather, those involved should identify goals, needs, constraints, and priorities. The college should probably outline a coordinated, yet flexible assessment plan that balances those considerations; it’s possible to try different approaches in different programs, to decide to focus on shared goals, or to do something in between.

As a note, some programs at WSU are in the process of developing staggered assessment plans, in which they assess only some goals each year.

OAI’s role

OAI has been working with this college’s assessment team for two years to develop, pilot, and refine a college-wide rubric and other complementary measures, including a senior exit survey and alumni survey.  OAI is also available to work with programs on their assessment plan, tools, and measures.

However, in the interest of making the best use of our collective time and efforts, before beginning to develop any program’s assessment plan, I suggest that the college consider the questions raised above.

If invited, OAI is available to consult with the college about different paths you might choose to take for useful, quality assessment.

Structure of and Access to Rain-King-Related Sites

From: Joshua Yeidel
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:33:07 -0700
To: “OAI.Personnel”
Conversation: Teamsite Migration Changes
Subject: Teamsite Migration Changes

This week, discussions about what-goes-where demonstrated (to me, anyway) that we didn’t have an easy-to-understand plan for (“up.w.e.”)and (“a.w.e.”) with regard to restricted-access sites vs. public access.  I worked out a somewhat-revised plan that can be summarized quickly:

All new sites on up.w.e. are public-access.All sites on a.w.e are restricted-access (in various ways), EXCEPT All sites in a.w.e/public are public-access.

More information in the attached wiki page.

OUE Teamsite Migration 2010-New Site Structure – ctltwiki

A Leader Asks, What is the Rain King Chronicle

It’s our blog of the story, or history of this assessment initiative we’ve launched.  We summarize and don’t name names (except our own).  Bits of notes go in this chronicle, for instance the liaison who told us “it is inappropriate for us to share our rubrics.”

It’s not just about keeping a history, which we are wishing we had done on a variety of projects in the past, but, we are also in this work reminded of the Bellow novel.  In the story, the lead character by happenstance becomes the Rain King of a remote African tribe only to learn that the tribal elders are plotting to have him beheaded….

Re: Flexing the deadline


Thanks for your offer. Some additional time to complete the report would be most welcomed. The process is already working to increase dialogue and engagement among faculty, which is fabulous. I really appreciate the thoughtful assistance and support from your group.