Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP - Archives

California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Soka University Japan - Transcend Art and Peace
Created: December 11, 2003
Latest Update: December 11, 2003
jeannecurran@habermas.org
takata@uwp.edu

Student Outcome Assessment Minority Report

Site Copyright: Jeanne Curran and Susan R. Takata and Individual Authors, December 2003.
"Fair use" encouraged.

I just received the majority report schedule of questions on Wednesday, as we were debriefing from our Visual Sociology Exhibition and returning projects to all who had participated. My primary concern was developing the catalog for the exhibition, and I am conflicted in taking this time for the SOA report, except that Alan assures me that it must have priority just now.

I have chosen to write a minority report because student outcome assessment is important to me. I am a specialist in learning theory. And I have a Ph.D. in Education, in addition to my postdoctoral work in sociology. My first reaction to the majority report survey was one of horror. "I can't do that." For this is not how I approach my students, not how I relate to them, not how I elicit and nurture their learning.

The data is in the form of a rating scale. That means that learning is being translated to numbers. Positivism. I understand the lure of calling evaluation "research," particularly in this frightening time of conservatism. But I cannot in good conscience subscribe to such a misapprehension of learning.

If in fact we do not expect "even good students . . .[to] excel in all areas," then why would we agree to stamp each student as good, better, or best for a free market, so that it can exploit them more efficiently, without having to assess their good qualities? I will not do so, for to do so violates every sense of justice known to me.

I will, in all good faith, account for the learning of my students in measurable form that is readily interpretable for non-academics. That I consider "accountability," not "labeling for the global market." If you will submit my minority report, I will be glad to complete one for each of the students you have named, but I will NOT submit it under their names. I consider that a violation of due process and confidentiality. I don't think that anyone should be so judged, and the results recorded, without their informed consent.

Sample Report for one of my students:

This student entered my class hesitant and fearful. She spoke often of "extra credit" and manifested a lack of confidence in her ability to confidently perform. Se was older than the average student, and that is often intimidating. Based on this assessment, my goals for her became:

• to increase her confidence in her own ability to perform cooperatively and competitively in traditional work settings.
• to reduce her fear of off-putting academic language
• to increase her willingness to approach others in different age groups and with different backgrounds.

The methodology I used to accomplish these goals was to first teach the theoretical concepts of answerability, accountability, responsibility, and transparency. (Definitions appended.)

• Having discussed the concepts in class, we read the sources. At this point, the student exhibited considerable confidence in the reading and freely asked questions.

• We used the concepts in class assignments, in which students were permitted to work in groups or individually, and the groups were not fixed, permitting several and different partners.

• In repeating this procedure throughout the semester, the student gained confidence in her own skills and in her ability to bond with others in working out solutions.

• On the last day of class, the student asked again if she might turn in extra work, and was mildly surprised that that would not be necessary for an A in the course. An inward smile said much: it was a recognition that her work had been confirmed.

Results:

For me, the most important measure of success was encountering this student at the Visual Sociology exhibit, discussing with another older student the post-retirement possibilities of a job that would offer satisfaction through social justice. This represents a long-term gain to the community, as well as growth for individual students.

Each student is different. The challenges and results are different. But these are the kinds of interactions that produce community growth and solidarity, and community answerability with the skills needed for governance and empowerment.

Difficulties:

My students are gone for the semester. I might be able to reconstruct some of this from their work. But many of them have already reclaimed their work, and I no longer have it. This means that I cannot produce as effective a job as I could have if such requirements had been set out much sooner. It's also the end of the semester, and I have other obligations at this point.

With adequate lead time, I could translate my work with students into a correspondence with the majority report's scales. But I cannot function by using those scales, for my substantive approach is too different. I suggest that this discrepancy be recognized as one of our first needs to adapt student outcome assessment effectively to our "real work," as Susan Takata would put it. jeanne