The Student Life Assessment Committee is comprised of representatives of all units within the Division of Student Life.

Assessment is one of those thankless tasks. But, when it is done and done well, it contributes enormously to well-managed and well-delivered programs, and ultimately to the benefit of student learning. These assessment nerds have been dedicated participants to the divisional goal of elevating the level of our our assessment practice.

The Student Life Pillars are probably more present in the assessment work than anywhere else. We are intentional about making sure that we are assessing each of our units’ contributions to access, diversity, engagement, care, and student learning. Organizational effectiveness is often an outgrowth of a unit-wide integrated assessment program.

Every single unit in Student Life has advanced their work and operational knowledge of assessment. Some units have implemented large assessment programs, and some units have started by gathering a little bit of data. All of it matters to our collective effectiveness and our contribution to the student experience.

Senior FIT graduates Alyssa `13 (center) and Rebecca `13 (far right) pose with fellow fitness instructors.  Both are leading Cardio Kickboxing this fall and look forward to adding a second class of Ab Lab to their winter quarter teaching schedule.

Fitness Instructor Training (FIT) Program

The new Fitness Instructor Training (FIT) Program is run through the Department of Recreational Sports Programs.  Created and managed by our Fitness Coordinators, Anne Garrett and Carrie Wigton.

The FIT Program was created to fill the need within our department to train students to become fitness instructors for our group exercise classes.  The FIT Program is set up as a quarter long concentrated classroom training, complemented by an apprenticeship in which the student is matched with an experienced instructor.  Following successful completion of the training program students are hired to teach specific group exercise classes throughout the year.

The FIT Program strives to improve student engagement and care by building opportunities for personal growth, social connection, strong investment in campus life and an educational experience for students’ well-being.  This program gives our department the ability to employ students in leadership positions and allows students to become skilled and educated in a position with job growth potential.  Students gain valuable work experience that will carry over into their professional lives by building their public speaking skills and enhancing their resumes.  Student instructors are teaching classes that help them prioritize and make time for fitness and well-being, as well as, help them make social connections and deepen their investment in campus life, with a hope that these experiences and priorities will carry over to their professional lives post-graduation.

Our inaugural FIT Program produced 6 new student instructors that our department hired to start teaching classes Fall 2012.

Student Testimonials from the Summer 2012 FIT Program:

It is a great leadership, teamwork, problem-solving, time managing, and self-reflecting experience. It’s really rewarding to be involved in getting others excited about exercise and even being the catalyst for a lifetime of fitness! I plan to have a career in either Athletic training or physical therapy, both of which are centered around teaching another person how to exercise and keep themselves healthy.

-Meghan Barrington, Physiology, Class of 2012

I have become significantly more confident speaking in front of others and being myself in front of a large group. I appreciate the chance to learn more about fitness and leadership in general…I would love to continue teaching past my work at the IMA and am thrilled to have been taught such a transferable skill-set.

-Rebecca McIntyre, Biology, Class of 2013

I really hope to continue teaching wherever life takes me… what I have learned from the FIT program will help me maintain an air of professionalism even when put on the spot. I have also learned to lead with confidence, which will make me a more effective leader in the future.

-Dani Olson, Botany, Class of 2015

Spotlight submitted by: Katie Beth, Recreational Sports Programs

This year, for the Class of 2016, the Office of Admissions received 26,135 applications, a 50% increase since 2006.  We offered admission to 15,462 (59%), knowing from past data and experience that 40% will confirm the offer. We expect a freshman class of 6,000.

How do we do it? From colleagues at other institutions, high school counselors, our peers across the nation, and the parents of prospective students, we often hear comments such as:
You don’t read all those essays, do you?  
I don’t believe what I read in those newspaper articles. There must be a shortcut.
You have a staff of how many??

Did we really read each application at least twice????  YES! We Really Do!

What does a typical year, or admissions cycle as we call it, look like? Since we’re about to gear up for another round, join us as we look back on the one we’re finishing up.

September – November
The focus is on outreach. Our recruitment staff is on the road, meeting prospective freshmen in Washington State; targeted states in the U.S., mostly in the West; and internationally in Asia, India, and Brazil. They also meet with students and families who visit campus.

• Read about Visit options for prospective students and families

December 1
This is the deadline for freshman applicants. More than 99% apply online.

December 2 – March 14
The focus turns to processing applications and reading files. Unlike what you may have seen in the movies, we don’t sit around a big table in a paneled room and discuss whether Juana B. Admitted is worthy. Instead, two members of the staff — including 13 trained graduate students — read every file in the privacy of his or her own office or cubicle.

Almost always, the two readers’ assessments are within a tiny margin, reflecting rigorous training and norming sessions that ensure constant adherence to a set of standards. If there is a discrepancy in the assessments, a file is read a third time; on rare occasions, a file is read a fourth time.

When readers are reviewing a student’s file, what are they looking for? In addition to evidence of academic preparation and performance, they look carefully at applicants’ activities, achievements, and personal characteristics.

• Read more about freshman review.

Meanwhile, members of the processing staff, increased by 25% for the season to include temporary staff, keep things organized and moving swiftly. The pressure is on to “finish all reads,” as we say in 320 Schmitz Hall, before March 15. The Admissions staff puts in some long hours and many Saturdays.

March 15 – 31
All applicants are notified of an admission decision during these two weeks. As noted, our goal is a freshman class of 6,000. We offered admission to 59%. The others receive either the warmest and most encouraging denial letter you will ever read, written by director of admissions Phil Ballinger; or the opportunity to be placed on the waitlist and notified of a final decision in June or July.

April 1 – May 1
The focus shifts back to the outreach staff, which presents Spring Preview Days as well as other programs to encourage highly sought after students to accept the offer of admission. May 1 is the date by which all admitted freshmen nationwide must confirm their college choice. This allows time for students to hear from all colleges and know the full extent of their financial aid packages.

Summer
We’re not quite done with freshmen, although many of the staff have moved on to processing and reviewing 5,000 transfer applications. At the time of application, freshman applicants are asked not to submit a transcript with their application. During the summer, we review final high school transcripts to ensure that enrolling freshmen a) maintained academic achievement in the senior year and b) completed minimum admission requirements. Yes, we really check every one.

And the Results?
Here’s the best answer we can give: Watch Ed Taylor’s speech at last fall’s Convocation. It’ll only get better this year!

The Class of 2016
(as of 7-25-12; the complete Freshman Profile will be available midway through autumn quarter.)

• 6,000 expected: 4,000 residents, 2,000 U.S. nonresidents + international
• Academic achievement (middle 50%) - GPA 3.65 – 3.93, ACT 26 – 31, SAT 1750 – 2020 (out of 2400)

Join us in welcoming these new freshmen to the UW community.

Paula Shields
Communications Manager
Office of Admissions
pshields@uw.edu

[sidebar]
By the Numbers
During the past year, we also provided services to prospective students, their families, high school counselors, community college advisers, the UW community, and the public through these channels:

• Website  | 871,380 unique visitors
• Campus tours | 24,117 visitors
• Freshman Information sessions| 6,337 students + family members
• Emails | 30,163
• Phone calls | 57,526
  

  ---

The Open House team is based in the University of Washington Police Department’s Office of Professional Standards & Training Division.  The team members, working under the direction of Commander Steve Rittereiser, are: Officer Wendy Matsuyama, Sgt. Anthony Stewart, Accreditation Manager Cheryl Price, Administrative Support Lynda Pease, and officers who helped set up the morning of the Open House.

From left to right: Officer Wendy Matsuyama, Sergeant Anthony Stewart, Administrative Assistant Lynda Pease and Policy and Accreditation Manager Cheryl Price.”

This year’s UWPD Open House was held April 18, from 1-4pm. It takes weeks of planning to put on this annual 3-hour event, and this year there was more campus participation than ever. It was a huge success thanks to the tremendous amount of planning and effort that went into the event!

Connecting to the Pillars of Student Life – Access, Diversity, Engagement, Care, Effectiveness, Learning:

All of the Student Life Pillars were covered in this event. The overall theme of the event is always Safety – how the UWPD promotes safety and security to and for the campus community. We invite other campus departments to set up tables at our event, give demonstrations of their care and effectiveness, and explain how they promote safety and security. We open our offices and vehicles, show off our Mobile Command post plans, our bike team and our explosive dog team.

We give Community Partner awards and our own Officer/Civilian/Supervisor of the Year awards – all to engage others and promote care and learning to everyone who attends. This event is open to everyone on campus – students, staff and faculty! We open our doors wide and give tours to show just how our police department works and how we are involved with our campus (and surrounding) community. We are full-fledged partners with our community and want to continually strengthen that partnership. Our Open House is one of the ways in which we support that cause.

Submitted by:  Steve Rittereiser, Office of Professional Standards & Training, UWPD

The original default graphic for a balanced scorecard is often the odometer (or a variant), which provides a quick view of how you are doing on any given measure. Stephen Few is a guy that I have been hearing about frequently, who argues that the traditional odometer is not only boring, but also not effective or appropriate for conveying the meaning of some data. This is the brave new world of data visualization! Well, maybe it’s not so new, but it’s new to me. Few’s website provides several examples of translating old, crusty graphs and charts into much more readable, understandable, and compelling illustrations. I am especially tickled by the 2004 table results of a Pew survey. Boy does that look familiar.

The intersection between data and graphics is awesome stuff. A quick read through Time Magazine or National Geographic will demonstrate that data visualization is essential for conveying a lot of information elegantly. This website provides 50 great examples of data visualization, and they are indeed great, if not a tiny bit headache-inducing. One of my favorite websites to look at for beautiful graphics (if not for teeny tiny font), is the Feltron Report. Feltron takes a mundane topic in his everyday life, and constructs methods of data collection and data visualization that tell a story over a year.

This whole notion of paying attention to what your data looks like so the reader can more easily make sense of it is something that is a tiny bit lost on most of us in higher education. Most of the time we’re lucky if we are gathering data at all. And if we do, it’s likely that we don’t have the time, skills, or inclination to make it pretty. But the easier it is for the reader to understand the data, the more likely it is that the reader remembers it, does something about it, shows it to others. And especially in our tough budget times, the more times the names of our services and programs are on peoples lips, the better.

Green Dot began on campus three years ago as a collaborative effort among five Student Life units and Safe Campus. Green Dot is a national movement to reduce the number of individuals who experience an act of Power Based Personal Violence, which includes but is not limited to sexual assault, physical or emotional relationship violence, domestic violence and stalking. Since its inception at UW in 2009, Green Dot has trained over 150 students to become active bystanders who help to reduce violence. Furthermore it has exposed thousands of additional students to the Green Dot approach and the fundamentals of becoming an active bystander. Additionally the committee was able to conduct a safety survey of students in 2011 to gain UW-specific data to learn in what ways and in what frequency our students experience these kinds of violence. The Green Dot steering committee has now expanded to include partners in Undergraduate Education and First Year Programs. The committee is truly a cross-campus collaboration born from Student Life.

Committee Participants from Student Life

Committee Participants from outside Student Life

Connecting to the Pillars of Student Life – CARE

Green Dot is rooted in care for the safety and well-being of all of our community members who deserve to live lives free from power based personal violence. Green Dot seeks to engage students, faculty, and staff in the creation of safety as our campus norm, where all members of our community actively contribute to the safety of others. By each campus community member taking small actions to look out for one another, to involve themselves when they see or hear things they know are not right, we believe we can significantly reduce the amount of violence experienced here at UW.

Outcomes

At the Bystander Training in June of 2011, 53 student were asked the following questions.

- How likely are you to do or say something next time you see a situation that feels high risk or concerning to you?

• 79% responded – “I will definitely do or say something if I see something that concerns me”

• 18% responded – “I am not sure if I can do something , but I would definitely get someone else to if I couldn’t”

- How likely are you to do a proactive green dot this week? (an action which demonstrates you care about the safety of others)

• 83% responded – “I will definitely do at least one proactive green dot, and also think I will do many more.”
• 12% responded – “I will do at least one green dot, but don’t think I’ll do any more”

Submitted by Sean Ferris, The HUB

NASPA is offering a three webinar series around Developing “Direct Hit” Data: Assessing Student Learning and Disseminating

Results . The first of these webinars, Measuring Learning through Student Affairs will be offered at 11:00am on Tuesday Feb 28, 2012 in Lander 134. We hope that you are able to attend the series or to send some of your staff to attend the series. More information on the series below:

Webinar 1: Measuring Learning Throughout Student Affairs
Tuesday, February 28, 2012 11 a.m.

Program Description:

Connecting the work of student affairs to student learning is critical to student success and the call for accountability within higher education. While many professionals learn how to write activity based learning outcomes, fewer are taught how to connect activity learning outcomes to higher level programmatic, departmental and divisional outcomes. This session will cover the various levels of learning outcomes, elements of a measurable outcome, and the interdependence of student learning across student affairs.

Learning Outcomes:

• Describe levels of learning outcomes (activity, program, department, divisional).
• Distinguish the level of specificity or breadth for each level of learning outcome.
• Discuss levels of learning outcomes within Student Affairs that are interdependent and build on one another.
• Ask questions and share best practices about writing and assessing learning outcomes, which will provide additional ideas of how to link learning experiences within their division.

Presenter Bios:

Mark Manderino, Second year doctoral student in Higher Education, Research Assistant at Loyola University Chicago

Formerly Mark served as the Assistant Director of Student Involvement at DePaul University, where he oversaw departmental assessment efforts and also served on the Student Affairs Assessment Committee, as well as co-chaired the Student Affairs Divisional Learning Outcomes Committee. In addition to his doctoral work, Mark currently serves as the Coordinator of Assessment in the Division of Student Affairs at DePaul and is responsible for helping guide departments in the development of learning outcomes, assisting departments in developing and executing assessment projects, and facilitating ongoing training related to writing learning outcomes. Mark has presented on the topic of assessment and student learning at the Association of Fraternity and Sorority Advisors (AFA) and learning outcomes at the NASPA Assessment and Retention Conference.

Ellen Meents DeCaigny, the Assistant Vice President for Assessment, Planning and Communications in the Division of Student Affairs at DePaul University

Ellen was responsible for developing the divisional assessment model and associated assessment processes that have been in place for the past 8 years at DePaul. Her responsibilities include chairing the division’s assessment committee, fostering a culture of assessment, increasing staff capacity around assessment, coordinating departmental assessment and research projects, coordinating divisional annual reporting processes, and sharing results. Ellen is also responsible for division-wide strategic planning and communications. Ellen currently serves as a national co-chair for the NASPA Assessment, Evaluation and Research Knowledge Community. She has co-authored a chapter on a mixed methods approach to assessment in student affairs and a chapter on student affairs research and assessment, both in AIR monographs. Prior to her work in assessment, Ellen served DePaul for seven years as the director of academic enhancement, overseeing orientation and first-year experience courses.

Webinar 2: Powerful Data: The Benefits of Direct Assessments in Student Affairs
Tuesday, March 27, 2012 11 a.m.

Program Description:

Assessment in student affairs has often been limited to indirect assessments, in which administrators ask students to self-report their development and degree of learning. Assessment experts are now encouraging staff to use direct assessments that require students to demonstrate their learning in quizzes, tests, portfolios, and observations. This webinar highlights three separate programs in housing, substance abuse prevention, and student leadership that used direct assessments to provide a more accurate picture of their student leaders’ learning. Participation in this webinar will help you learn more about how to assess what your students actually know.

Learning Outcomes:

• Describe what direct assessments are, and identify several key principles related to direct assessments.
• Analyze three programs at the University of North Carolina Wilmington that have used direct assessments, which can be compared and adapted to their own institution’s assessment efforts.
• Discuss how such initiatives can be effectively designed, implemented, assessed, and applied.
• Ask questions and share best practices about direct assessments, which will provide additional ideas of how to apply these methods at their own institution.

Presenters Bio:

Nathan Lindsay, Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment, University of Missouri-Kansas City 
Dr. Nathan Lindsay is the Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC), where he coordinates all assessment activities for the university related to student learning outcomes. He also serves as an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Higher Education program at UMKC. He previously was the Director of Student Life Assessment at the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW).

Amiee Hourigan, Assistant Director for Substance Abuse Prevention, CROSSROADS, University of North Carolina Wilmington

As Assistant Director for Campus Prevention at UNCW, Aimee Hourigan plans, implements and evaluates a comprehensive, campus-wide alcohol and drug abuse prevention program. Her primary responsibilities include supervising a peer education program, providing consultation about alcohol and drug issues to students, faculty, staff, and groups, delivering classroom-based interventions, and implementing grant-funded research projects.

Jennifer Smist, Program Director for the Weston Exploration and LEADS Living Learning Communities at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

She previously served as the Assistant Director in the Center for Leadership Education and Service at UNCW. She has professional experience in leadership education and development, community service-learning, civic engagement, research and assessment, and teaching.

Webinar 3: “We’ve Heard Your Voice”: Sharing Data and Action Steps with Students
Tuesday, April 24, 2012 11 a.m.

Program Description:

Although students are endlessly asked to take surveys for institutional improvement, rarely do they learn how these assessments are used. This webinar highlights a student affairs initiative entitled “We’ve Heard Your Voice” (implemented at the University of North Carolina Wilmington) that communicates assessment findings back to the student body and other constituents. This webinar will feature an overview on the various media used to communicate improvements, as well as the benefits of these efforts.

Learning Outcomes:

• Discuss the value of making public the final products of assessment (i.e., the institutional action steps that are carried out in response to feedback).
• Analyze the types of information that can be communicated between a student affairs office and students, parents, and other constituents.
• Outline how to successfully launch a “We’ve Heard Your Voice” program, including necessary resources and various media that can be used to present data and action steps. For example, the insights gained and challenges overcome during the process of developing approximately 65 different campus fliers will be highlighted.
• Describe how these efforts can impact the culture of assessment and improvement on campus, as well as how this can be documented for the purposes of accreditation.

Presenter Bio:

Nathan Lindsay, Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment, University of Missouri-Kansas City

Dr. Nathan Lindsay is the Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC), where he coordinates all assessment activities for the university related to student learning outcomes. He also serves as an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Higher Education program at UMKC. He previously was the Director of Student Life Assessment at the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW).

Briana Keller Assistant Director Career Center

Jennifer Self Director of the Q Center Campus Life

For more information on the UW Distinguished Staff Awards: http://www.washington.edu/admin/hr/dsa/index.html

This committee was charged with coming up with a proposal for a formal recognition program to recognize the work of teams in Housing & Food Services. The committee had a short timeline to finish the proposal; three months over the summer of 2011. This would be the first formal recognition program for Housing & Food Services, so the committee had to start from scratch. In the end, the proposal was accepted by the HFS leadership team, and is now accepting nominations.

The committee was extremely thoughtful in how the program was designed, and many details were considered. The committee did research on motivation, and interviewed other Universities as well as other departments at UW to find out how they recognize employees. One of the biggest challenges was making sure the award itself would meet the state rules regarding the use of University/Department funds for recognition.

The final award will do the following: align with Departmental values and organizational goals, acknowledge work done on teams that significantly impacts the Department and students in a positive way, provide a venue for teams to review and evaluate their work, and will increase motivation for individuals to be valuable contributors to teams.

Connecting to the Pillars of Student Life

LEARNING: The award is designed as a self-nomination process, and part of the intent for the award was to provide a venue for teams to reflect and learn. Also embedded in the award was a value placed on thoughtful planning, collaboration and communication rather than strictly awarding for outcomes. The reasoning for this was that our department values teams that learn from mistakes, and makes decisions based on collection of data and input from stakeholders. Sometimes this means that a project needs to revise goals or change direction, or simply not move forward. In the end, learning is important not only for UW students, but also UW staff.

Left to right: Tammy Taecker, Anthony Phan-leBlanc, Dawn Gatta, Alissa Dunloy, George Tramountanas

February 23, 2012

Ok, this is going to be a little bit choppy. I have never blogged before, but thought that it was time to put some of our Divisional assessment work out there so people inside the division (and outside, too, I suppose) can access it and put it to work.

In 2009, Student Life identified assessment as a top priority for our division for the purposes of improving our practice and telling our story. The primary role of assessment is to provide outcome data/information to a decision-maker so that the person can make good decisions. All too often, we are making decisions about how to change a program or deliver a service without any data. And while we didn’t have the foresight to predict the higher education fiscal landscape in 2009, we have discovered that doing good assessment also means that we have good answers when the budget cut conversations come around again and we are asked to provide metrics for our work.

So what is assessment? Assessment is ‘any effort to gather, analyze, and interpret evidence that describes institutional, departmental, divisional, or agency effectiveness’ (Schuh, 2009). Ideally, assessment reflects program goals, which are in turn nested in departmental goals, which are in turn nested in divisional goals, which are in turn nested in university goals, which are in turn nested in educational values. The more embedded assessment is – that is to say, the more assessment a part of program development and design instead of an afterthought – the better. Moreover, assessment doesn’t have to take the shape of giant all-student surveys that occur once every three years. Rather, assessment is more useful if it is ongoing and measures whatever matters most, rather than measuring everything at the same time.

Sometimes people get assessment mixed up with evaluation. So what is evaluation? Evaluation is ‘any effort to use assessment evidence to improve institutional effectiveness, solve a problem, help make a decision, or establish a policy’ (Schuh, 2009). Evaluation is usually summative (done at the conclusion of something, like a course) and there is generally a value judgement associated with it, as for worth or quality, like a grade. You might also hear the term measurement used, which is quantifying information, such as the length of a room. All three (assessment, measurement, and evaluation) are related, but refer to different things.

Here are a couple of good webpages that draw out the distinctions between the three:

Assessment, Measurement and Evaluation in Education

Assessment, Measurement, Evaluation, and Research