Baiting the Hook: Creating a Culture of Assessment Evilu Pridgeon & Lisa Casto

1. Texas Association for Institutional Research February 6, 2008 Baiting the Hook: Creating a Culture of Assessment Evilu Pridgeon & Lisa Casto

2. Overview of Presentation • AiDallas • History • SACS • How it happened • What we did • The Results

3. The Art Institute of Dallas • Private College • SACS accredited since 1997 • Program Accreditation in Interior Design and Culinary Arts • 1700 students • 100 full- and part-time faculty (60/40)

4. Degrees Offered • Culinary Arts Associate of Applied Science (AAS) • Restaurant & Catering Management, AAS • Art of Cooking Certificate • Design • Advertising, Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) • Graphic Design, Associate of Applied Arts (AAA), BFA • Web Design and Interactive Media, BFA

5. Degrees (Con’t.) • Fashion Design, AAA, BFA • Fashion & Retail Management, BFA • Interior Design BFA • Media Arts & Animation • Video Production AAA • Digital Filmmaking & Video Production BFA

6. History at AiDallas • Accredited in 1997 • Re-accreditation visit by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), Commission on Colleges (COC) in 2003 • After two monitoring reports, placed on probation Dec. 2006 because of lack of adequate documentation of ongoing assessment

7. How It Happened • Confusing directions • Poor communication • Lack of support from leadership • Perpetual crisis mode

8. How It Happened • Models were too complicated • Each department was insulated • IE Committee was a “rubber stamp” • Only two people reviewed plans

9. What We Did • Created an action plan • Made major staff changes (president, DIER) • Hired Institutional Effectiveness Associates (IEA -- Jim and Karen Nichols) for training of entire faculty/staff and IE Committee • Developed timeline and shared with Ai community • Hand-picked committee

10. Training • Nichols • All Faculty and Staff • Grouped by Administrative/Support and Academics • Rubrics • Five column model • Constructive feedback • Objective writing (SMART) • Committee • Selected members attended conference

11. Best Interest of the Student (BIOS) • All outcomes and objectives were student-focused • Academics: improve the programs to benefit students • Administrative/Educational Support: customer service focused to improve services to students

12. The Institutional Effectiveness CommitteeKey to Our Success • Hand-picked from recommendations • Primarily faculty – should always be faculty-driven • Committed to the success of the school • Motivated to assist • Possessed leadership skills with opportunity for further development • Nearly all academic departments represented • Included a few curmudgeons – to keep us honest

13. The Institutional Effectiveness Committee -- Key to Our Success • Varied Skill Sets (writing, math, reasoning) • Continued training in assessment • Invested in the school’s success • Provide communication and leadership • Continue to reward and recognize committee every quarter

14. Outcomes/Objectives Development • Faculty/staff brainstormed as a group in each department • From the long list, a short list was chosen • Turn into IE Committee for review each year • Outcomes/Objectives change yearly

15. Rubrics Development • Increased resources in library • All IEC members received reading material • Faculty in each department developed rough drafts • Refined by small group which included some IE members, faculty from within the department as well as wordsmiths from other departments • Rubrics are continuously refined based on faculty and Professional Advisory Committee (PAC) members.

16. The Total Process • Plans are turned in quarterly with previous quarter’s assessment data • Each plan reviewed by two or more members • Constructive feedback • Focus on meaning and logical processes, not grammar • Chair and IE Director review and give feedback, sometimes in person • Departments make corrections and resubmit

17. Finalization • Departments submit narrative describing department changes and explaining significant data • Subset of committee edits narratives and plans into one report • Report is reviewed by President and VPAA • Final report submitted to SACS • Significant changes are reported at all faculty and staff meeting

18. Communication • Updates provided at school-wide meetings • Improvements in programs/services announced yearly • Annual Presentations to: • Executive Committee • Board of Trustees

19. The Results • Mock Visiting Committee said: • Real sense of shared commitment • If you involve people in the process – the decision- making -- they own it. • IE process was embraced • Faculty/staff felt they were being heard and validated.

20. Mock Visit Results (Con’t.) • Employees expressed feeling empowered • Feel involved, believe it has been a worthwhile process and hope it will continue • “It has become part of the culture” • Lots of positive comments about the IEC • “It (IEC) has worked very well; has been very helpful”

21. Comments from Special Visiting Committee • “No basis for making recommendations” in any area • “The Committee perceived the results of those changes (action plan) to be very positive in establishing an evaluation system that apparently has significant support from the faculty and administration as well” • “. . . the Committee perceived a strong commitment from those parties [faculty and academic administrators] to continue with the efforts underway to enhance the quality of learning among their students”

22. December, 2006 The Art Institute of Dallas was removed from probation with no further sanctions

23. TIMELINE FOR FY 2008

24. Ongoing • Institutional Effectiveness is a part of our culture • Ongoing training for new faculty and committee members • The road goes on forever… • and the party never ends

25. Contact Information • Lisa Casto, Director of Library Services • Chair, Institutional Effectiveness Committee • lcasto@aii.edu • 214-692-8080, ext. 1246 • Evilu Pridgeon, Director of Institutional Effectiveness & Research • epridgeon@aii.edu • 214-692-8080, ext. 1177