My Account Log in

6 options

The Collegiate Learning Assessment : setting standards for performance at a college or university / Chaitra M. Hardison, Anna-Marie Vilamovska.

DOAB Directory of Open Access Books Available online

View online

EBSCOhost Academic eBook Collection (North America) Available online

View online

EBSCOhost Ebook Education Collection Available online

View online

EBSCOhost eBook Community College Collection Available online

View online

JSTOR Books Open Access Available online

View online

RAND Reports Available online

View online
Format:
Book
Author/Creator:
Hardison, Chaitra M.
Contributor:
Vilamovska, Anna-Marie.
Series:
Technical Report
Language:
English
Subjects (All):
Collegiate Learning Assessment.
Universities and colleges--Standards--United States.
Universities and colleges.
Physical Description:
1 online resource (123 p.)
Place of Publication:
Santa Monica, CA : RAND, 2009.
Language Note:
English
Summary:
The Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) is a measure of how much students' critical thinking improves after attending college or university. This report illustrates how institutions can set their own standards on the CLA using a method that is appropriate for the CLA's unique characteristics.
Contents:
Cover; PREFACE; CONTENTS; TABLES; SUMMARY; ACKNOWLEDGMENTS; ABBREVIATIONS; 1. INTRODUCTION; THE COLLEGIATE LEARNING ASSESSMENT; ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT; 2. BACKGROUND ON STANDARD SETTING; STANDARD-SETTING TECHNIQUES; EVALUATING STANDARD-SETTING METHODOLOGIES; 3. STANDARD-SETTING STUDY METHOD; PARTICIPANTS; MATERIALS; PROCEDURE; 4. STANDARD-SETTING STUDY RESULTS; WAS THERE CONSISTENCY ACROSS INDIVIDUALS IN WHERE THEYPLACED THE CUT POINTS?; WAS THERE GENERALLY MORE OR LESS AGREEMENT ACROSS INDIVIDUALS ON ONE OF THE THREE CUT POINTS THAN ON THE OTHER TWO?
WAS THERE MORE AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS ON SOME PTs THAN ON OTHERS?DID THE CONSENSUS STEP TEND TO RAISE OR LOWER STANDARDS?; DID THE CONSENSUS STEP INCREASE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FRESHMAN CUT POINTS AND SENIOR CUT POINTS ON THE SAME STANDARD?; DID THE CONSENSUS STEP BRING THE CUT POINTS CLOSER TOGETHER (REDUCE THE STANDARD DEVIATIONS)?; WAS THERE CONSISTENCY ACROSS TASKS ON THE AVERAGE CUT POINTS?; WAS THERE CONSISTENCY ACROSS PANELS ON WHERE THEY PLACED THE CUT POINTS FOR A GIVEN TASK?; WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FRESHMAN AND SENIOR GROUP CONSENSUS STANDARDS CONSISTENT ACROSS PTs?
DID THE SORTING STEP INDICATE THE PANELISTS COULD APPLY THEIRGROUP CONSENSUS STANDARDS TO A NEW BATCH OF ANSWERS?5. STANDARD-SETTING STUDY CONCLUSIONS; 6. SUMMARY AND NOTES OF CAUTION; APPENDICES; A. SAMPLE PERFORMANCE TASK SCREEN SHOTS: CRIME; B. LOW-, MID-, AND HIGH-LEVEL CRIME RESPONSES; C. QUESTIONNAIRE ITEM AND SCALE MEANS AND STANDARDDEVIATIONS; D. INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP STANDARD-SETTING RESULTS; E. SORTING RESULTS; F. FEEDBACK FORM MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS; REFERENCES
Notes:
Description based upon print version of record.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN:
1-282-39857-1
9786612398575
0-8330-4897-X
OCLC:
469698751

The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.

Find

Home Release notes

My Account

Shelf Request an item Bookmarks Fines and fees Settings

Guides

Using the Find catalog Using Articles+ Using your account