Open letter to students –

In a week or two, Springfield College sophomores will take standardized tests in reading in math to help us fulfill one of our requirements for accreditation. So it’s only fair for us to explain why we’re asking you to do it and what benefits we hope to gain from it.

You’ll benefit, too.

The tests will be given Wednesday, April 2, from 10 a.m. to noon, and again in the afternoon. They’re part of the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) developed by ACT Inc., the same company that handles the state tests required by the Illinois State Board of Education of high school juniors.

Let’s be clear about why we do this. As a condition of accreditation, colleges and universities are required by the federal government and the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges to give their students “multiple instruments [tests] that include direct measures of student learning,” as former North Central official Cecilia L. López put it. NCA, in turn, is under pressure from the federal government, which has gone as far as as recommending -- unsucessfully so far -- specific standardized tests we might be required to buy in the future (Miller). Colleges are also required to document “changes proposed and made in teaching, curricula and/or academic support services as a direct result of information derived from the analysis of the [test] data.” Next month’s CAAP tests are one of those instruments, and our testing is part of that process.

In other words, we’re mandated by North Central to give some kind of tests for student learning assessment – the key word is “multiple instruments” – and CAAP is the best we can find on the market. It’s that simple.

But there’s more to it than that. As long as we’re required to do assessment, we want to learn what we can from it. And the standardized tests are only part of the process. We also assess learning in the classroom, usually without calling attention to it. If you’ve filled out one of those little clearest-point, most-confusing-point surveys at the end of a class period, you were taking one of North Central’s “multiple instruments.”

It makes sense to do it that way, I think, because all the instruments are flawed. A true-false test measures one kind of learning, an essay exam measures another. But no one test can measure everything. And learning changes over time. If it doesn’t, it isn’t learning. Right? (Think about it: Do you know as much now as you did this time last week?) So we use the different tests given at different points in time to validate each other, in much the same way you set up a control for your experiments in a laboratory exercise.

At a faculty meeting last month, Springfield-Benedictine instructors were asked what they consider the main value of student learning assessment. “Fulfilling a requirement,” said one, no doubt voicing what others were thinking. But the rest focused overwhelmingly on helping students.

“Finding out what helps students learn – fine-tuning curricula & teaching methods,” said another, when asked the same question. Some others: “To see if I am covering topics adequately, to see if there are questions to re-address, to see what students learned/found most interesting – feedback to improve teaching.” … “I get an idea of what I have done over the semester, aside from just reviewing students’ papers and exams.” … “To keep the integrity of academic goals/objectives; to benefit students.” … “It helps me figure out what they know & what they need help with before they are graded.” … “Allowing immediate student interaction with me; helps my teaching style.” … “I believe the main value is for the instructor to find out (through the students of course) what topics students are struggling with or need help with.”

As the instructors’ responses to the survey suggest, most assessment at Springfield College takes place in the classroom. But the math and reading tests are an important part of our program, too. That’s because the CAAP, in the vendor’s words, is a “standardized, nationally normed assessment program.” In plain English, that means it’s a national test that allows us to draw nationwide comparisons.

And those comparisons allow us to make informed decisions.

Here’s an example of how it works. We’ve been giving the CAAP reading test for five years as one measure assessing our General Education program. The scores have been remarkably consistent, with our students’ average scores within 1 percent of the national average for students in two-year private colleges.

CAAP Reading Scores, 2003-2007

The numbers by themselves don’t tell us much (although I’ve got to admit we were relieved in 2003 and 2004 when they came in, since we had no way of knowing how we stacked up before we started nationally normed testing). In fact, as chair of the faculty assessment committee I had wanted to give the reading test because I suspected a lot of our students had difficulty reading.

But the numbers suggest my hunch about reading scores was off base, and we need different strategies for improving reading scores than I had envisioned. It’s not that we don’t still need to help you read better; it’s just that we have a better sense of how to go about it now we have data from the national test scores.

So this year a Gen Ed subcommittee is reviewing our standardized testing program, and it is re-assessing (there’s that word again) the reading test in light of our scores over the last five years. Perhaps there are better ways of dealing with reading. Perhaps we need to focus more on writing, as some members of the subcommittee have suggested. Perhaps we’ll decide something else. The important thing is that as we make our decisions about reading and writing assessment, they will be based on hard data about student learning.

And that is why it’s so important we have a good turnout for the CAAP test in April.

The better the response rate, the better the data we get from the CAAP tests. The better the data, the better the decisions we will make. And the better our decisions, the better the education you’ll get from us. The benefits are subtle, and they’re indirect. But they’re as real as the skills you’ll take with you out into the job market.

-- Pete Ellertsen, chair, assessment committee

Works Cited

López, Cecilia L. The Commission’s Assessment Initiative: A Progress Report. Higher Learning Commission, North Central Association. 1998. 18 March 2008. www.emporia.edu/asem/pdf/98_NCA_SAA_Annual_Meet.pdf. .

Miller, Charles. "Memo from the Chairman." Inside Higher Ed 24 Jan. 2006. 18 March 2008. http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2006/01/24/miller.

Springfield College. Assessment Committee. Annual Reports. 2001-2003, 2004, 2005-2006, 2007. 18 March 2008. http://www.sci.edu/assessment/reports01toc.html.