Do you know how Kent State faculty and professional staff determine if students are learning and developing? Here are some direct and indirect exemplary examples:
Case studies are used to assess students' ability to apply theoretical knowledge to real-world scenarios. By analyzing complex, context-specific problems, students demonstrate critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills. Faculty use structured rubrics to evaluate the depth of analysis, creativity of solutions, and application of discipline-specific knowledge. (direct measure)
Example: Business Administration MBA Students collaborate in teams to complete a written case analysis as their final assignment in a series of four case submissions. The instructor evaluates the case using a course-specific rubric, while two members of the ACCBE Assessment Committee independently assess the same artifacts using the College's critical thinking and global mindset rubric. This dual evaluation process ensures consistency in grading and provides insights into students' critical thinking and global perspective development. (Click here for rubric)
Employer satisfaction surveys provide valuable feedback on graduate performance in the workplace, assessing their readiness and ability to meet professional standards. These surveys help programs evaluate the effectiveness of their training and identify areas for improvement. (indirect measure)
- Example: The Radiation Therapy program uses an employer satisfaction survey to assess graduates' ability to interpret treatment charts and accurately set up treatment parameters. Conducted 12 months post-graduation, the survey measures satisfaction on a scale of 1 (Dissatisfied) to 3 (Very Satisfied), with a target of 90% of employers reporting being satisfied or very satisfied. Data collected is analyzed by the Program Director to inform program enhancements
Exit surveys capture students' reflections on their learning experiences, perceived preparedness for careers or further study, and satisfaction with the program. The data helps identify opportunities to enhance curriculum and student support services. (indirect measure)
Example: Construction Management BS uses a senior exit survey to assess students' perceived achievement of key learning outcomes, including creating construction project cost estimates and schedules—critical pillars of the field. As part of ACCE accreditation, students rate their achievement on these outcomes, with a target of 70% rating "high" or "very high" in each category.
Major Field Tests are standardized assessments that benchmark student performance against national norms. The results provide valuable insights into program strengths and areas for enhancement by comparing outcomes to peer institutions. (direct measure)
Example: Chemistry and Biochemistry BS programs test knowledge of Chemistry is demonstrated by taking the Major Field Test (MFT) in Chemistry. The standard exam assesses mastery of the core foundational courses in chemistry; General Chemistry and/or Organic Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, Analytical Chemistry and Biochemistry. Acceptable Target is measured by aggregate scores in the 50th percentile or greater.
Portfolios showcase a range of work completed throughout the program, providing a comprehensive view of skill development and learning progression. Faculty use rubrics to assess artifacts in portfolios for alignment with program-level learning outcomes. (direct measure)
Example: Communication Studies BA assesses multiple program learning outcomes through a Senior Portfolio in the capstone course COMM 46091: Senior Seminar. Using both original and adapted AAC&U VALUE rubrics, students demonstrate their ability to analyze, connect, and apply knowledge to their academic and professional journeys. The program typically aims for 80% of students to score 3 or above, from emphasizing critical thinking as essential for navigating complex information and making informed decisions to analyzing diverse perspectives and situated lived experiences in communication settings. This assessment process provides flexibility for students to reflect on and integrate their learning experiences effectively. (Contact value@aacu.org for licensed, editable rubrics)
Thesis defenses allows students to demonstrate their mastery of research, methodologies, and findings. Students present their work to a faculty panel, who evaluate their ability to articulate and defend their thesis, preferably using a detailed rubric. Key aspects assessed include clarity, analysis, engagement with literature, and critical thinking. This process ensures students meet high academic standards and are prepared to contribute to their field. (direct measure)
Example: Studio Art Division committees assess Master's thesis defenses by reviewing written work, observing the installation collectively, and providing real-time feedback during the defense. A written evaluation, detailing achievement levels for program learning outcomes, is submitted after the committee's deliberation. (Click here for review scoring form)
