Survey Of Assessment Practices In Higher Education

SURVEY PARTICIPANTS

LIST OF TABLES

COLLEGE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

COLLEGE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS

SUMMARY CHAPTER 1: DEPARTMENTAL ASSESSMENT

DEVELOPING AN ASSESSMENT PLAN

ASSESSMENT PLAN

ASSESSMENT OFFICE

USE OF SOFTWARE TO AID IN ASSESSMENT

SUMMARY CHAPTER 2: STANDARDIZED TESTING

REMEDIAL COURSES

PAYOUT FOR STANDARDIZED TESTING

SUMMARY CHAPTER 3: ASSESSMENT OFFICE

PERCENTAGE OF COLLEGES WITH AN ASSESSMENT OFFICE

FULL TIME ASSESSMENT EMPLOYEES

ASSESSMENT OFFICE SALARY RANGE

ASSESSMENT OFFICE SIZE

ANNUAL ASSESSMENT OFFICE BUDGET

ASSESSMENT PROFESSIONALS WORKING OUTSIDE OF THE MAIN ASSESSMENT OFFICE

SIZE OF THE BASIC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION FORM

SUMMARY CHAPTER 4: STUDENT ASSESSMENT OF INSTRUCTORS

QUESTIONNAIRES

IMPACT OF STUDENT ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRES ON TENURE DECISIONS.

IMPACT OF STUDENT FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRES ON THE HIRING AND RETENTION OF

ADJUNCT INSTRUCTORS

FORMATS USED FOR THE COMPLETION OF STUDENT ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRES

IMPACT OF STUDENT COURSE EVALUATIONS ON MERIT PAY INCREASES FOR INSTRUCTORS

SUMMARY CHAPTER 5: EVALUATION OF ADJUNCT FACULTY

COURSES TAUGHT BY ADJUNCT FACULTY

METHODS OF EVALUATING ADJUNCT FACULTY

POLICY ON DETERMINING THE EVALUATION OF ADJUNCT FACULTY

THE EVALUATION OF ADJUNCT INSTRUCTORS

The Use of Student Evaluation Forms in Evaluating Adjunct Instructors

The Use of Standardized Tests in Evaluating Adjunct Instructors

The Use of In Class Visits by Full-Time Professors in Evaluating Adjunct Instructors

EVALUATING INSTRUCTORS

The Use of Student Evaluation Forms in Evaluating Full Time Instructors

The Use of Standardized Tests to Evaluate Learning in Chosen Majors in Evaluating Instructors ... 32

The Use of Standardized Tests Provided by Testing Companies to Obtain Results to Compare to

National Data in Evaluating Instructors

The Use of In Class Visits by Full-Time Professors or Other Evaluators in Evaluating Instructors.. 33

SUMMARY CHAPTER 6: FACULTY INVOLVEMENT IN ASSESSMENT

ROLE OF COLLEGE FACULTY IN DEVELOPING THE COLLEGE’S ASSESSMENT VEHICLES

FACULTY VIEWS ON ASSESSMENT EFFORTS

CENTERS TO DEVELOP FACULTY TEACHING SKILLS

APPROXIMATE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT OFFICE SPENDING

POLICY TO LINK INSTRUCTOR COMPENSATION TO DOCUMENTED INCREASES IN TEACHING

EFFECTIVENESS

SUMMARY CHAPTER 7: TUTORING

TUTORING OR STUDENT LEARNING CENTER

Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

LOCATION OF THE TUTORING OR LEARNING CENTER

SUMMARY CHAPTER 8: ASSESSING STUDENT SERVICES

SUMMARY CHAPTER 9: ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENT

SUMMARY CHAPTER 10: CURRICULUM CHANGES

SUMMARY CHAPTER 11: USE OF BENCHMARKING DATA

THE PURCHASE OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKING DATA

COLLEGES THAT USE ZOOMERANG

COLLEGES THAT USE WEAVEONLINE

COLLEGES THAT USE SURVEYMONKEY

COLLEGES THAT USE WEBSURVEYOR

COLLEGES THAT USE STUDENTVOICE

COLLEGES THAT USE KEY SURVEY

COLLEGES THAT USE SURVEY TRACKER

COLLEGES THAT USE SNAP

COLLEGES THAT USE FLASHLIGHT ONLINE

COLLEGES THAT USE ULTIMATE SURVEY

SUMMARY CHAPTER 12: USE OF CONSULTANTS AND SERVICES

SPENDING ON OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS AND SERVICES RELATED TO ASSESSMENT

Conferences Devoted to Assessment that Administrators Attended in the Past Year

SUMMARY CHAPTER 13: POST GRADUATE ASSESSMENT

COLLEGES WITH A POST GRADUATE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO GRADUATE

INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER OUT OF COLLEGE

INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO DROP OUT OF COLLEGE

NUMBER OF EXIT INTERVIEWS FOR GRADUATING STUDENTS

EXIT INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED WITH STUDENTS WHO LEFT THE COLLEGE FOR ANY REASON

COMPENSATION FOR STUDENTS THAT TAKE EXIT INTERVIEWS

CHAPTER 1: DEPARTMENTAL ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 2: STANDARDIZED TESTING

CHAPTER 3: ASSESSMENT OFFICE

CHAPTER 4: STUDENT ASSESSMENT OF INSTRUCTORS

CHAPTER 5: EVALUATION OF ADJUNCT FACULTY

CHAPTER 6: FACULTY INVOLVEMENT IN ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 7: TUTORING

CHAPTER 8: ASSESSING STUDENT SERVICES

CHAPTER 9: ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENT

CHAPTER 10: CURRICULUM CHANGES

CHAPTER 11: USE OF BENCHMARKING DATA

CHAPTER 12: USE OF CONSULTANTS AND SERVICES

CHAPTER 13: POST GRADUATION ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 14: ASSESSING ASSESSMENT

OTHER REPORTS FROM PRIMARY RESEARCH GROUP, INC.

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Percentage of colleges in the sample that require that academic departments develop an assessment plan identifying key concepts and ideas that students should master

Table 1.2: Percentage of colleges in the sample that require that academic departments develop an assessment plan identifying key concepts and ideas that students should master, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.3: Percentage of colleges in the sample that require that academic departments develop an assessment plan identifying key concepts and ideas that students should master, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.4: Percentage of colleges in the sample that require that academic departments develop an assessment plan identifying key concepts and ideas that students should master, Broken Out by Full time equivalent enrollment

Table 1.5: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of the major departments in the college that have developed a detailed assessment plan

Table 1.6: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of the major departments in the college that have developed a detailed assessment plan, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.7: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of the major departments in the college that have developed a detailed assessment plan, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.8: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of the major departments in the college that have developed a detailed assessment plan, Broken Out by Full time equivalent enrollment

Table 1.9: Percentage of college assessment offices (or other office entrusted with this task) that communicate with academic departments through designated assessment coordinators in the various academic departments

Table 1.10: Percentage of college assessment offices (or other office entrusted with this task) that communicate with academic departments through designated assessment coordinators in the various academic departments, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.11: Percentage of college assessment offices (or other office entrusted with this task) that communicate with academic departments through designated assessment coordinators in the various academic departments, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.12: Percentage of college assessment offices (or other office entrusted with this task) that communicate with academic departments through designated assessment coordinators in the various academic departments, Broken Out by Full time equivalent enrollment

Table 1.13: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package ACT

Table 1.14: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package ACT, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.15: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package ACT, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.16: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package ACT, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.17: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package Accuplacer

Table 1.18: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package Accuplacer, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.19: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package Accuplacer, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.20: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package Accuplacer, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.21: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package COMPASS

Table 1.22: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package COMPASS, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.23: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package COMPASS, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.24: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that use the Assessment Package COMPASS, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.25: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Mathematics Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen

Table 1.26: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Mathematics Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.27: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Mathematics Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.28: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Mathematics Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.29: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Reading Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen

Table 1.30: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Reading Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.31: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Reading Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.32: Percentage of Colleges that Administer the Reading Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.33: Percentage of Colleges in the sample that Administer the Writing Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen

Table 1.34: Percentage of Colleges in the sample that Administer the Writing Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.35: Percentage of Colleges in the sample that Administer the Writing Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.36: Percentage of Colleges in the sample that Administer the Writing Section of COMPASS to incoming Freshmen, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.37: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the NSSE Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 1.38: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the NSSE, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.39: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the NSSE, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.40: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the NSSE, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.41: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the HERI

Table 1.42: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the HERI, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.43: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the HERI, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.44: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the HERI, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.45: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used data from Educational Benchmarking, Inc.

Table 1.46: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used data from Educational Benchmarking, Inc., Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.47: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used data from Educational Benchmarking, Inc., Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.48: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used data from Educational Benchmarking, Inc., Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.49: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the Center for Education Assessment

Table 1.50: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the Center for Education Assessment, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.51: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the Center for Education Assessment, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.52: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used the Center for Education Assessment, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 1.53: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used Chalk & Wire EPortfolio

Table 1.54: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used Chalk & Wire Eportfolio, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 1.55: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used Chalk & Wire Eportfolio, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 1.56: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that have ever used Chalk & Wire Eportfolio, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.1: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in WRITING for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum

Table 2.2: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in WRITING for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.3: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in WRITING for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.4: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in WRITING for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.5: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in STUDY SKILLS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum

Table 2.6: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in STUDY SKILLS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.7: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in STUDY SKILLS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.8: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in STUDY SKILLS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.9: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum

Table 2.10: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.11: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.12: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.13: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in MATHEMATICS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum

Table 2.14: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in MATHEMATICS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.15: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in MATHEMATICS for students who do not perform well enough on Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.16: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in MATHEMATICS for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.17: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in INFORMATION/COMPUTER LITERACY for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum

Table 2.18: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in INFORMATION/COMPUTER LITERACY for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.19: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in INFORMATION/COMPUTER LITERACY for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.20: Percentage of Colleges in the Sample that offer remedial or developmental courses in INFORMATION/COMPUTER LITERACY for students who do not perform well enough on standardized tests to take the normal college curriculum, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.21: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum amount that colleges in the sample spent to pay students to take standardized tests that are primarily used within the college to aid it in its assessment efforts in $U.S

Table 2.22: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum amount that colleges in the sample spent to pay students to take standardized tests that are primarily used within the college to aid it in its assessment efforts, in $U.S., Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.23: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum amount that colleges in the sample spent to pay students to take standardized tests that are primarily used within the college to aid it in its assessment efforts in $U.S., Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.24: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum amount that colleges in the sample spent to pay students to take standardized tests that are primarily used within the college to aid it in its assessment efforts in $U.S., Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 2.25: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer a higher rate of pay or reward to students that score higher on standardized assessment tests, on the theory that this encourages full student effort

Table 2.26: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer a higher rate of pay or reward to students that score higher on standardized assessment tests, on the theory that this encourages full student effort, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 2.27: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer a higher rate of pay or reward to students that score higher on standardized assessment tests, on the theory that this encourages full student effort, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 2.28: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer a higher rate of pay or reward to students that score higher on standardized assessment tests, on the theory that this encourages full student effort, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.2: Percentage of colleges that have an office of assessment or similar office or department that primarily devotes itself to assessment

Table 3.3: Percentage of colleges that have an office of assessment or similar office or department that primarily devotes itself to assessment, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.4: Percentage of colleges that have an office of assessment or similar office or department that primarily devotes itself to assessment, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.5: Percentage of colleges that have an office of assessment or similar office or department that primarily devotes itself to assessment, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.6: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum Number of Full Time Employees in the sample college's office of assessment, or similar office that is primarily devoted to this function

Table 3.7: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum Number of Full Time Employees in the sample college’s office of assessment, or similar office that is primarily devoted to this function, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.8: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum Number of Full Time Employees in the sample college’s office of assessment, or similar office that is primarily devoted to this function, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.9: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum Number of Full Time Employees in the sample college’s office of assessment, or similar office that is primarily devoted to this function, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.10: Annual salary range for the highest ranking assessment officer

Table 3.11: Annual salary range for the highest ranking assessment officer, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.12: Annual salary range for the highest ranking assessment officer, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.13: Annual salary range for the highest ranking assessment officer, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.14: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum size of college assessment office for colleges in the sample, in square feet

Table 3.15: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum size of college assessment office for colleges in the sample, in square feet, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.16: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum size of college assessment office for colleges in the sample, in square feet, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.17: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum size of college assessment office for colleges in the sample, in square feet, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.18: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual budget, for colleges in the sample, of the assessment office, including salaries and overhead (in $U.S.) Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 3.19: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual budget, for colleges in the sample, of the assessment office, including salaries and overhead, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.20: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual budget, for colleges in the sample, of the assessment office, including salaries and overhead., Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.21: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual budget, for colleges in the sample, of the assessment office, including salaries and overhead, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.22: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of assessment professionals working in other offices outside of the main college assessment office

Table 3.23: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of assessment professionals working in other offices outside of the main college assessment office, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.24: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of assessment professionals working in other offices outside of the main college assessment office, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.25: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of assessment professionals working in other offices outside of the main college assessment office, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 3.26: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of questions on the basic instructor evaluation form given to students

Table 3.27: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of questions on the basic instructor evaluation form given to students, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 3.28: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of questions on the basic instructor evaluation form given to students, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 3.29: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum number of questions that the basic instructor evaluation form given to students, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 4.1: Description of college's policies towards questionnaires for student assessment of instructors

Table 4.2: Description of college’s policies towards questionnaires for student assessment of instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 4.3: Description of college’s policies towards questionnaires for student assessment of instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 4.4: Description of college’s policies towards questionnaires for student assessment of instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 4.5: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on tenure decisions

Table 4.6: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on tenure decisions, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 4.7: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on tenure decisions, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 4.8: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on tenure decisions, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 4.9: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on retention decisions regarding ADJUNCT instructors

Table 4.10: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on retention decisions regarding ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 4.11: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on retention decisions regarding ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 4.12: Description of the impact of student faculty assessment questionnaires on retention decisions regarding ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 4.13: Description of formats used for the completion of student assessment questionnaires

Table 4.14: Description of formats used for the completion of student assessment questionnaires, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 4.15: Description of formats used for the completion of student assessment questionnaires, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 4.16: Description of formats used for the completion of student assessment questionnaires, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 4.17: Description of the impact of student course evaluations on merit pay increases for instructors

Table 4.18: Description of the impact of student course evaluations on merit pay increases for instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 4.19: Description of the impact of student course evaluations on merit pay increases for instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 4.20: Description of the impact of student course evaluations on merit pay increases for instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.1: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of courses taught by adjunct faculty

Table 5.2: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of courses taught by adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.3: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of courses taught by adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.4: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum percentage of courses taught by adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.5: Description of the method for evaluating adjunct faculty

Table 5.6: Description of the method for evaluating adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.7: Description of the method for evaluating adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.8: Description of the method for evaluating adjunct faculty, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.9: Description of college's policy towards determining the evaluation of ADJUNCT instructors

Table 5.10: Description of college’s policy towards determining the evaluation of ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 5.11: Description of college’s policy towards determining the evaluation of ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.12: Description of college’s policy towards determining the evaluation of ADJUNCT instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.13: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate adjunct instructors

Table 5.14: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.15: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.16: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.17: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate adjunct instructors

Table 5.18: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.19: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.20: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.21: Percentage of colleges that commonly use in class visits by full-time professors to evaluate adjunct instructors

Table 5.22: Percentage of colleges that commonly use in class visits by full-time professors to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.23: Percentage of colleges that commonly use in class visits by full-time professors to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.24: Percentage of colleges that commonly use in class visits by full-time professors to evaluate adjunct instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.25: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate instructors

Table 5.26: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.27: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.28: Percentage of colleges that commonly use student evaluation forms to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.29: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate student learning in chosen majors

Table 5.30: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate student learning in chosen majors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.31: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate student learning in chosen majors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.32: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests to evaluate student learning in chosen majors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.33: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests provided by testing companies to obtain results to compare to national data

Table 5.34: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests provided by testing companies to obtain results to compare to national data to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.35: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests provided by testing companies to obtain results to compare to national data, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.36: Percentage of colleges that commonly use standardized tests Provided by Testing Companies to Obtain Results to Compare to National Data to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 5.37: Percentage of colleges that commonly use In Class Visits by Full time professors or instructors or other evaluators to evaluate instructors

Table 5.38: Percentage of colleges that commonly use In Class Visits by Full time professors or instructors or other evaluators to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 5.39: Percentage of colleges that commonly use In Class Visits by Full time professors or instructors or other evaluators to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 5.40: Percentage of colleges that commonly use In Class Visits by Full time professors or instructors or other evaluators to evaluate instructors, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 6.1: Description of college faculty's role in developing the college's assessment vehicles

Table 6.2: Description of college faculty’s role in developing the college’s assessment vehicles, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 6.3: Description of college faculty’s role in developing the college’s assessment vehicles, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 6.4: Description of college faculty’s role in developing the college’s assessment vehicles, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 6.5: Description of college faculty’s views of the assessment efforts of the college administration

Table 6.6: Description of college faculty’s views of the assessment efforts of the college administration, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 6.7: Description of college faculty’s views of the assessment efforts of the college administration, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 6.8: Description of college faculty’s views of the assessment efforts of the college administration, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 6.9: Percentage of colleges in the sample that have one or more centers to develop faculty teaching skills

Table 6.10: Percentage of colleges in the sample that have one or more centers to develop faculty teaching skills, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 6.11: Percentage of colleges in the sample that have one or more centers to develop faculty teaching skills, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 6.12: Percentage of colleges in the sample that have one or more centers to develop faculty teaching skills, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 6.13: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate annual spending for staff, office space, software, and other costs for colleges in the sample that have such centers (In $ US)

Table 6.14: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual spending for staff, office space, software, and other costs for colleges in the sample that have such centers, Broken Out by Type of College (In $ US)

Table 6.15: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual spending for staff, office space, software, and other costs for colleges in the sample that have such centers, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status (In $ US)

Table 6.16: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum annual spending for staff, office space, software, and other costs for colleges in the sample that have such centers, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (In $ US)

Table 6.17: Percentages of colleges in the sample that say they have a clear policy to link instructor compensation to documented increases in teaching effectiveness

Table 6.18: Percentages of colleges in the sample that say they have a clear policy to link instructor compensation to documented increases in teaching effectiveness, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 6.19: Percentages of colleges in the sample that say they have a clear policy to link instructor compensation to documented increases in teaching effectiveness, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 6.20: Percentages of colleges in the sample that say they have a clear policy to link instructor compensation to documented increases in teaching effectiveness, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 7.1: Percentage of colleges that have a tutoring or student learning center

Table 7.2: Percentage of colleges that have a tutoring or student learning center, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 7.3: Percentage of colleges that have a tutoring or student learning center, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 7.4: Percentage of colleges that have a tutoring or student learning center, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 7.5: Description of the location of the tutoring or learning center for colleges that have one

Table 7.6: Description of the location of the tutoring or learning center for colleges that have one, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 7.7: Description of the location of the tutoring or learning center for colleges that have one, Broken Out by Public or Private institutional status

Table 7.8: Description of the location of the tutoring or learning center for colleges that have one, Broken Out by Full time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 8.1: Percentage of colleges that survey student satisfaction with student services such as the food service, dormitory services, bookstore, library, etc

Table 8.2: Percentage of colleges that survey student satisfaction with student services such as the food service, dormitory services, bookstore, library, etc. , Broken Out by Type of College

Table 8.3: Percentage of colleges that survey student satisfaction with student services such as the food service, dormitory services, bookstore, library, etc. , Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 8.4: Percentage of colleges that survey student satisfaction with student services such as the food service, dormitory services, bookstore, library, etc. , Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 9.1: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer an annual “assessment day” or “assessment workshop” or “assessment seminar” or its equivalent for faculty and staff

Table 9.2: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer an annual “assessment day” or “assessment workshop” or “assessment seminar” or its equivalent for faculty and staff, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 9.3: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer an annual “assessment day” or “assessment workshop” or “assessment seminar” or its equivalent for faculty and staff, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 9.4: Percentage of colleges sampled that offer an annual “assessment day” or “assessment workshop” or “assessment seminar” or its equivalent for faculty and staff, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 10.1: Description of the success of assessment efforts for colleges sampled

Table 10.2: Description of the success of assessment efforts for colleges sampled, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 10.3: Description of the success of assessment efforts for colleges sampled, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 10.4: Description of the success of assessment efforts for colleges sampled, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.1: Percentage of colleges sampled that have ever purchased student performance benchmarking data to compare their students’ performance to that of national norms

Table 11.2: Percentage of colleges sampled that have ever purchased student performance benchmarking data to compare their students’ performance to that of national norms, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.3: Percentage of colleges sampled that have ever purchased student performance benchmarking data to compare their students’ performance to that of national norms, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.4: Percentage of colleges sampled that have ever purchased student performance benchmarking data to compare their students’ performance to that of national norms, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.5: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ZOOMERANG for assessment purposes

Table 11.6: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ZOOMERANG for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.7: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ZOOMERANG for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.8: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ZOOMERANG for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.9: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEAVEONLINE for assessment purposes

Table 11.10: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEAVEONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 11.11: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEAVEONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.12: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEAVEONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.13: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEYMONKEY for assessment purposes

Table 11.14: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEYMONKEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.15: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEYMONKEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.16: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEYMONKEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.17: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEBSURVEYOR for assessment purposes

Table 11.18: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEBSURVEYOR for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.19: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEBSURVEYOR for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.20: Percentage of colleges sampled that use WEBSURVEYOR for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.21: Percentage of colleges sampled that use STUDENTVOICE for assessment purposes

Table 11.22: Percentage of colleges sampled that use STUDENTVOICE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.23: Percentage of colleges sampled that use STUDENTVOICE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.24: Percentage of colleges sampled that use STUDENTVOICE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.25: Percentage of colleges sampled that use KEY SURVEY for assessment purposes

Table 11.26: Percentage of colleges sampled that use KEY SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.27: Percentage of colleges sampled that use KEY SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.28: Percentage of colleges sampled that use KEY SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.29: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEY TRACKER PLUS for assessment purposes

Table 11.30: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEY TRACKER PLUS for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.31: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEY TRACKER PLUS for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.32: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SURVEY TRACKER PLUS for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.33: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SNAP for assessment purposes

Table 11.34: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SNAP for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.35: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SNAP for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.36: Percentage of colleges sampled that use SNAP for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.37: Percentage of colleges sampled that use FLASHLIGHT ONLINE for assessment purposes

Table 11.38: Percentage of colleges sampled that use FLASHLIGHT ONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.39: Percentage of colleges sampled that use FLASHLIGHT ONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.40: Percentage of colleges sampled that use FLASHLIGHT ONLINE for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 11.41: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ULTIMATE SURVEY for assessment purposes

Table 11.42: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ULTIMATE SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 11.43: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ULTIMATE SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 11.44: Percentage of colleges sampled that use ULTIMATE SURVEY for assessment purposes, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 12.1: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum spending by the college administration on outside consultants, reports, conferences and other consulting services related to assessment within the past year (in $U.S.)

Table 12.2: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum spending by the college administration on outside consultants, reports, conferences and other consulting services related to assessment within the past year, Broken Out by Type of College (in $U.S.)

Table 12.3: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum spending by the college administration on outside consultants, reports, conferences and other consulting services related to assessment within the past year, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status (in $U.S.)

Table 12.4: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum spending by the college administration on outside consultants, reports, conferences and other consulting services related to assessment within the past year, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (in $U.S.)

Table 12.5: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of conferences devoted to assessment issues that ADMINISTRATORS from colleges surveyed attended in the past year

Table 12.6: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of conferences devoted to assessment issues that ADMINISTRATORS from colleges surveyed attended in the past year, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 12.7: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of conferences devoted to assessment issues that ADMINISTRATORS from colleges surveyed attended in the past year, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status Survey of Assessment Practices in Higher Education

Table 12.8: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of conferences devoted to assessment issues that ADMINISTRATORS from colleges surveyed attended in the past year, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.1: Percentage of colleges surveyed that have a post graduate assessment program

Table 13.2: Percentage of colleges surveyed that have a post graduate assessment program, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.3: Percentage of colleges surveyed that have a post graduate assessment program, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.4: Percentage of colleges surveyed that have a post graduate assessment program, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.5: Percentage of colleges surveyed that at least once per year conduct INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO GRADUATE

Table 13.6: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO GRADUATE, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.7: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO GRADUATE, Broken Out By Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.8: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO GRADUATE at least once per year, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.9: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER OUT OF COLLEGE

Table 13.10: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER OUT OF COLLEGE, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.11: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER OUT OF COLLEGE, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.12: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER OUT OF COLLEGE, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.13: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO DROP OUT OF COLLEGE

Table 13.14: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO DROP OUT OF THE COLLEGE, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.15: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO DROP OUT OF THE COLLEGE, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.16: Percentage of colleges surveyed that conduct at least once per year INTERVIEWS OF STUDENTS WHO DROP OUT OF THE COLLEGE, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.17: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with graduating students

Table 13.18: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with graduating students, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.19: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with graduating students, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.20: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with graduating students, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.21: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with students who left the college for any reason in the past year

Table 13.22: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with students who left the college for any reason in the past year, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.23: Mean, Median, Minimum and Maximum approximate number of exit interviews conducted with students who left the college for any reason in the past year, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment

Table 13.24: Percentage of colleges that offer compensation of any kind for students that take exit interviews

Table 13.25: Percentage of colleges that offer compensation of any kind for students that take exit interviews, Broken Out by Type of College

Table 13.26: Percentage of colleges that offer compensation of any kind for students that take exit interviews, Broken Out by Public or Private Institutional Status

Table 13.27: Percentage of colleges that offer compensation of any kind for students that take exit interviews, Broken Out by Full Time Equivalent Enrollment