Winter Institute, January 8, 1998 19th Annual Institute Thursday, January 8 WEATHER REPORT: CLOUDY AND 58 DEGREES TODAY IN SCOTTSDALE! Oh! Oh! General Session I Presenter: David Gerkin, "Program Evaluation in the LAC at Paradise Valley Community College" David indicated that his presentation would consist of answering questions: Why evaluate my program? What are the benefits? Who should evaluate my program? What data should I gather? How should I gather the data? What methods or instruments should I use? When should I gather the data? Annual, end of term, midterm, ongoing? How should I compile the data I have gathered? While responding to these questions, he discussed usage of statistics, the difference between and uses of formal and informal evaluation, student evaluations of tutoring, evaluations of staff, tutor training program evaluation, staff evaluation of LAC-Retreat, the program effectiveness report, and the list of improvements needed. He explained that his data management system was made more effective because he was able to link with the campus Student Information System in order to instantly obtain vital data concerning any student enrolled. This accommodation eliminated the time-consuming activity of having a student fill out lengthy forms while duplicating information already available on the SIS. It also saved time otherwise spent in the labor-intensive process of inputing the data on the LAC computer. It was noted that without an SIS accommodation or one similar to it, other LACs could not expect to replicate this system. Responses: Gene Kerstiens centered his remarks around the problem of developing data that one's superior would accept as evidence that the program was either effective or in need of serious repair, the problem being that many administrators are vague about this matter -- until the annual report is already published. Guillermo Uribe noted that it is important to (1) gather all data that could possibly relate to the LAC's mission & goals, and (2) to organize (format) same so that it could be quickly and efficiently analyzed to be applied upon an administrator's request or demand. General Session II Presenter: Guillermo Uribe, "Student Assessment and Program Evaluation in the ULC at the University of Arizona" He prefaced his remarks with the statement that decisions should be based upon evidence that focuses on program effectiveness especially because LACs are under particularly sharp scrutiny. In order to cope with these conditions, assessment should comprise careful planning, monitoring, and studying of impact. These involve the use of a variety of assessment methods, getting staff involved with the process, consulting target populations to gain collaboration, collecting accurate data, and producing (publicizing) timely results that address critical issues and decisions. Monitoring these activities involves dealing with the forces of inevitable change like dealing with state mandates and budget cuts. Typical factors involved in measuring the effectiveness of a program are persistence (the length of time a strategy or program should be studied), performance (how well do students perform (GPA or class standing), and cost benefit (cost-effectivenss or value-added effect). He emphasized that taking advantage of the campus data repository information warehouse (like David Gerkin's Student Information System) saves paper work, helps sort and categorize data, and serves as a filter while choosing control groups. Responses: David Gerkin emphasized that a variety of methods and instruments utilized to achieve assessment works synergistically to complement & enrich the results of data analysis. Georgine Materniak indicated that the quality and accuracy of data is so important that the entire LAC staff must be enlisted to preserve its integrity. Talk with you tomorrow, hopefully with a better weather report. Gene Kerstiens <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>