FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W268517346> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W268517346 startingPage "43" @default.
• W268517346 abstract "Can there be anyone in the honors community or higher education who has not been assaulted by campus assessment initiatives in the recent past or the present? The current agitation surrounding this topic is equaled only by the absence of clear ideas about the purpose or utility of assessment. While assessment's proponents believe that its aims and virtues are obvious, most of the academic community is either vexed or bemused by the whole thing. How has higher education arrived at this juncture, and where are we going in regard to assessment? I will try to give some answers to these questions. As will become obvious, at least in the state of Washington assessment began as a political issue and in response to concerns about higher education, but is increasingly driven by pressures internal to higher education itself. Additionally, is not at all clear that assessment is measuring anything meaningful. The impetus to assess higher education in Washington originated outside higher education itself, springing from political concerns about and a sense that public higher education was under-educating or miseducating students. Like all politically driven initiatives, sprang as much from the re-election needs of legislators as from any genuine concern with issues relevant to higher education itself, and at least according to my reading of the tea leaves in my own state, the initiatives here were hero bills, i.e., measures legislators were bound to introduce as a result of promises they made on the campaign trail. Of course, assessment means assessors, and so the office on my campus responsible for a number of activities, e.g., administration of student evaluation of teaching, collection of various kinds of data for the state legislature, and production of reports for internal and external constituencies on a number of aspects of student satisfaction, became the home of assessment. On this campus, state mandates found an ally, able and ready to collect information and assume responsibility for assessment, indeed to take up the banner and act as advocates for the process. National efforts have joined local ones in depicting assessment as a positive good. In the words of one of its advocates, Richard Hersh, a Senior Fellow at the Council for Aid to Education, it is an educational, professional, and ethical duty of higher education to assess its impact on student learning in ways that promote our educational mission and at the same time improve accountability (Hersch, 1). The very passion of assessment's constituents is a measure of both the hollowness that comes of taking this sort of initiative as an ethical imperative and the utter lack of intellectual underpinning for it. Poor Kant would shudder, indeed may well be shuddering at this very moment. In fact, while many are willing to trumpet the necessity of assessment, nowhere have I seen a reasoned pedagogical justification for its practice, nor is one likely to be forthcoming. I have seen no evidence that assessment has led to any demonstrable improvement in higher education, and save for the portion, I think, no one can produce such evidence. We do have more things to report to the legislature, whether or not those things have any value, educationally or otherwise. Above all, I believe, assessment defects stem from its demands for immediate answers to questions about a very long process and, in its most important aspects, a life-long process. Does even make any sense to pose these sorts of questions to a first-year college student? There is no need to continue the litany, but is worth asking about the grist for the mill of assessment. As Alexander (Sandy) Astin of UCLA, among the nation's most careful students of assessment, has so trenchantly noted, the strongest and most persistent correlation on the most common assessment instrument, student evaluations of teaching, is between numbers and grades--classes filled with students who receive high grades generally also receive good numerical evaluations, and those whose students receive low grades generally score low. …" @default.
• W268517346 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W268517346 creator A5079295691 @default.
• W268517346 date "2006-03-22" @default.
• W268517346 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W268517346 title "Accountable to Whom? Assessment for What?" @default.
• W268517346 cites W1517245736 @default.
• W268517346 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W268517346 type Work @default.
• W268517346 sameAs 268517346 @default.
• W268517346 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W268517346 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W268517346 hasAuthorship W268517346A5079295691 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C51364203 @default.
• W268517346 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C11413529 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C120912362 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C144024400 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C154945302 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C17744445 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C19417346 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C199539241 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C3116431 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C39549134 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C41008148 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C48103436 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C51364203 @default.
• W268517346 hasConceptScore W268517346C94625758 @default.
• W268517346 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W268517346 hasLocation W2685173461 @default.
• W268517346 hasOpenAccess W268517346 @default.
• W268517346 hasPrimaryLocation W2685173461 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W1608627663 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2026462464 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2027619276 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2084878502 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2104007393 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2114990859 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W217946830 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2314425945 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2317669344 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2326657235 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W236728670 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W265068967 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W276068496 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W277836869 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W910549613 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2140365408 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2565737307 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2596587017 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2601795660 @default.
• W268517346 hasRelatedWork W2771021407 @default.
• W268517346 hasVolume "7" @default.
• W268517346 isParatext "false" @default.
• W268517346 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W268517346 magId "268517346" @default.
• W268517346 workType "article" @default.