Page 57 - International Journal of Process Educaiton (Special Issue)

Figure 2 Assessment Methodology

Step Explanation

1. Develop guidelines for the assessor to follow when assessing a performance.

Both assessee & a. Define the purpose of the performance.
assessor: b. Define the purpose of the assessment.

c. Determine what is appropriate to be assessed.

d. Agree on what should be reported and how it should be reported (for the assessment/
feedback report).

2. Design the methods used for the assessment.

Both assessee & a. Inventory a list of possible criteria to be used as part of the assessment.
assessor: b. Choose the criteria from this list which best meet the previously established guidelines
(Step 1).

c. Determine an appropriate attribute (or set of attributes) for each of the chosen criteria
(Step 2b) which will be used to assess the assessee’s performance.

d. Determine the appropriate scale for each attribute (Step 2c) which will be used to
determine or measure the quality of the assessee’s performance.

3. Collect information during the performance.

The assessor: a. Set up a system to complete and collect information pertaining to the attributes.

b. Measure the collected information against the established attributes using the determined
scales.

c. Document the assessee’s strengths, areas for improvement, and insights which will be
shared with the assessee.

d. Offer feedback during the performance, if appropriate and agreed upon beforehand, with
the assessee.

4. Report the findings to the assessee.

The assessor: a. Share the assessment report with the assessee. This includes information gathered
during the performance and how it relates to the criteria, along with feedback for improving
future performances.

b. Analyze a performance that is believed to be poor or of low quality. Determine what part
is due to the information collected, the criteria chosen, and/or the performance itself.

Assessment most effectively leads to improvement when  Writing a Self-Study Report (Racine, 2007b)
it is part of ongoing practice. This means that it must be
part of the very design of the operational context it is  Methodology for Designing a Program Assessment
meant to improve. This design insight led directly to the System (Collins & Apple, 2007)
Program Design Institute, based on the Methodology for
Program Design (Davis, 2007b). It is no surprise that Step  Writing Performance Criteria for a Program (Nibert,
19 of this methodology is “Design a program assessment 2007)
system.” Numerous programs have implemented the
methodology’s design steps, among them an honor's  Identifying Performance Measures for a Program
program (University of Indianapolis), an Emerging (Parmley & Apple, 2007b)
Scholars Programs (University of Alaska – Fairbanks,
College of Rural Alaska, Kuskokwim Campus), and a  Constructing a Table of Measures (Racine, 2007a)
Learning Communities Program (St. Augustine College)
(Pacific Crest, 2015).  Writing an Annual Assessment Report (Parmley &
Apple, 2007c)
The focus on assessment at the program level led directly
to numerous additional modules in the Faculty Guidebook:  Assessing Program Assessment Systems (Parmley &
Apple, 2007a)

International Journal of Process Education (February 2016, Volume 8 Issue 1) 55