Academic Assessment FAQs
Does assessment include faculty evaluation?
No – absolutely not. The purpose of learning assessment is to improve student learning and it is not to be used as a way of evaluating instructors. No individual faculty member has the sole responsibility for ensuring that program’s goals are met. Therefore, any assessment of progress on academic goals must not be used to evaluate any individual faculty member.
How is grading different from assessment?
Generally, the goal of grading is to evaluate student learning, whereas the goal of assessment is to improve it. Grading is the analysis and use of data by faculty to make judgments about an individual student’s performance. Assessment, on the other hand, is a way to measure student learning overall and improve student learning within a course or program.
Grading plays an important role in assessment, of course, as grades can provide useful evidence of student learning when they are based on direct measures (tests, projects, papers, etc.) that are clearly linked to course learning goals and consistent with standards. However, assessment typically goes beyond grading by systematically examining patterns of student learning and using this information to improve educational practices.
How is assessment different from research?
Assessment and research are similar in many ways: Both involve asking questions, collecting data, and analyzing results. Like research, assessment activities may use quantitative or qualitative research methods, and benefits from a mixed methods approach.
However, the goal of research is to confirm or challenge hypotheses to guide theory, whereas the goal of assessment is to produce reasonably accurate information about how well we are meeting our goals and guide local practice. Many factors limit the scope and impact of assessment: time, resources, implementation, etc.. As such, assessment findings typically have implications for a single course, program or institution, whereas research findings have broader implications.
Faculty, staff, and administrators make decisions regularly, and decisions are best informed by evidence. Good assessment practices can and should guide local practice for the continual improvement of the student experience.
| Assessment | Research |
|---|---|
| Localized findings | Generalizable findings |
| Guides practice | Guides theory |
| Does not require IRB | Requires IRB |
Assuming assessment findings will not be published, activities that are conducted for internal decision-making do not require IRB review. IRB approval is required for generalizable research involving human subjects. See CUNY’s policies on Human Research.
What constitutes evidence of student learning?
This question is best rephrased as, ‘How do we know that our students are learning?’ and it might be useful to keep in mind that gathering evidence of students’ learning is something you have been doing for most of your academic career.
While the evidence we gather is not the result of randomized controlled trials, we can, however, triangulate our measures of student learning, keep up to date with the literature on teaching and learning, and continually reflect on how learning can be improved. For example, a grade is one measure of student learning, and grades can provide useful evidence of student learning if they are based on direct measures (exams, projects, papers, etc.) that are clearly linked to course learning goals.
Student learning is best measured using several assessment methods (direct indirect measures). To avoid easy measures that do not sufficiently mirror the complexity of student learning, we must also take into account the peculiarities of a discipline to which assessment methods are applied.
To learn more, see Linda Susky’s Examples of Evidence of Student Learning, or check out Susan A. Ambrose’ How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching.
Why should an academic program have a mission statement?
A mission statement is a public-facing document that identifies а program’ constituents and what the program intends to provide to them. As such, mission statements are foundational to the process of assessment, providing clarity and direction by establishing the context in which the program operates and an overview of its goals.
For example, mission statements, which are broad and general, are closely tied to a program’s statements of goals, which provide a bridge between the purpose of a program and the strategies to be used to assess and guide the ways in which the program achieves its mission.
Why should a syllabus include course learning goals and objectives?
Having clear learning goals and measurable objectives (aka SLOs) on syllabi is helpful for both students and instructors. Clearly stated goals and objectives helps students to know what the expectations are for a course ( the learning goals) and how they will be evaluated (the measurable objectives), which can positively impact student motivation and self-efficacy, and encourages students to self-assess. For instructors, having clear learning goals and objectives for a course helps to structure course content, which aids in the effective evaluation of student work. This is also known as mapping — the process of aligning learning goals to assignments and activities to ensure that learning goals are addressed in the course (or curriculum) in ways that support students’ opportunities to develop needed skills and knowledge.
What is the difference between learning goals and objectives?
Learning goals are the broad statements we make about what we expect students to know and be able to do as a result of completing a learning experience (e.g. a reading assignment, a course module, a course or a program).
Measurable learning objectives, aka Student learning objectives (SLOs), are statements that describe the observable or measurable behaviors that would indicate the level of mastery students have achieved as a result of a learning experience. Rephrasing our learning goals for a course or program in this way can help us determine whether the learning goals we set for our students have been met, and is especially helpful for standards-based grading, which focuses on mastery.
Where goals are broad and general, objectives are concrete and measurable, bridging the gap between goals and assessment methods.
| Goals | Objectives |
|---|---|
| broad/abstract | narrow/concrete |
| general intentions | specific actions |
| difficult to measure | measurable |
What is the difference between direct and indirect measures?
‘Direct measurement’ refers to measuring exactly the thing that you’re looking to measure, while ‘indirect measurement’ means that you’re measuring something by measuring something else.
Direct measures are those that measure student learning by assessing actual samples of student work. Examples include: exams/tests, papers, projects, presentations, portfolios, performances, etc. Because direct measures capture what students know and can do, and even how well, these are best for measuring achievement of student learning on specific objectives.
Indirect measures imply student learning by employing self-reported data and reports. Indirect measures help to substantiate instances of student learning. Indirect measures include surveys, interviews, course evaluations, and reports on retention, graduation, and placement, etc. These measures are commonly used in conjunction with direct measures of student learning, as best practices recommend the use of both direct indirect measures when determining the degree of student learning that has taken place.
How is program assessment different from the Academic Program Review (APR) process?
The APR process is a comprehensive self-assessment to identify a program’s challenges and opportunities in areas of quality, service, efficiency and resources. Assessment of student learning is just one component of this process. Program assessment activities, on the other hand, is totally focused on the assessment student learning and outcomes. Furthermore, while APR self-studies take place once every few years, program assessment should take place much more frequently to gather information that will enable a program to identify issues that may (or may not) require attention in a timely fashion.
What is the connection between assessment and accreditation?
The short answer is that institutions and state policymakers both make use of assessment findings. However, assessment and accreditation are very different processes with very different goals.
Accreditation is a process by which an educational institution is certified by an independent body to award certificates and degrees. The process was established nearly a century ago to foster a common set of educational standards among secondary schools and universities.
But while accreditation self studies aim to demonstrate that fiscal and human resources are being invested responsibly, faculty and staff conduct assessment to improve programs and practice. Assessment findings are an important part of the accreditation process as a key source of the evidence that we provide to our accreditation bodies, but the primary focus of assessment is to inform local decisions pertaining to courses, majors, programs, and support offices, whereas accreditation activities are meant to inform external reviewers.
| Assessment | Accreditation |
|---|---|
| Ongoing | Periodic |
| Informs local practice | Informs external reviewers |
| Focuses on self-improvement | Focuses on institutional quality |
Queens College is accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE). See our 2017 MSCHE Self-Study here, or learn about our 2026 MSCHE Self-Study process here.
Is there a single document I can refer to on academic assessment?
Yes! See our Introduction to Academic Assessment. To request support for an assessment activity, visit our Support page.
“The art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge.” ― Thomas Berger