Why Assess?
Assessment provides a clear conceptualization of our goals, an understanding of how these goals are aligned to the strategies meant to accomplish them, a plan for how we will know whether our goals are being met, and confirmation on whether and where current practices are working the way we intended.
Guiding Principles
1. Assessment is meaningful when it begins with genuine questions.
2. Assessment is effective when activities are designed to be manageable and sustainable.
3. Assessment findings are reliable when they are based on multiple measures.
4. Assessment can be transformative when it promotes knowledge-exchange through collaboration.
5. Assessment leads to improvement when faculty and staff own the process of assessment.
Key Differences
Assessment vs. 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Assuming assessment findings will not be published, activities that are conducted for internal decision-making do not require IRB review.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.
Assessment vs. Grading
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, as grades can provide useful evidence of student learning when they are based on direct measures (exams, projects, papers, etc.) that are linked to course learning goals. However, assessment goes beyond grading by examining patterns of student learning and using this information to improve educational practices at the course and program level.
Assessment vs. Accreditation
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.
Other Considerations
Who Conducts Assessment?
- Faculty define and conduct assessment of student learning.
- Staff define and conduct assessment of administrative and support services.
- Chairs and assessment liaisons conduct program assessment.
Who Supports Assessment?
- The President and Cabinet advocate for a culture of assessment at QC.
- The Provost and CETLL guide academic departments in APR Self-studies.
- The Assessment Council provides feedback on annual assessment reports.
- Assessment Coordinators guide committees and chairs throughout an activity.
- The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) provides data and applied research expertise for assessment projects.
Advantages vs. Challenges
Meaningful assessment demands thoughtful practitioners. Assessment can certainly be used in a careless and damaging fashion, especially when assessment is treated as an end in itself. The extent to which a desired outcome is easy to measure can have little to do with the degree to which it is worthy of measurement.
The process of assessment is only useful and meaningful when guided by the curiosity and intellectual dialogue that characterize the culture of higher education, when methods draw on multiple measures, following principles of research, and when our educational values are made clear through the methods of assessment.
Regarding course and program assessment, it is especially important to acknowledge that (a) learning is a complex process with cognitive, affective, and social dimensions that involves not only knowledge and understanding, but also values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect students’ success in and beyond the classroom, and (c) teaching as an ongoing process of inquiry, experimentation, and reflection. Does assessment take time and effort? Yes. But taking the time to address questions about teaching, learning, and curricular alignment can dramatically improve the effectiveness of courses and programs, and facilitate valuable interdisciplinary discussions about student learning.
– Adapted from the APA Statement on Outcomes Assessment
