Assessment Update

Assessment
January–February 2004
Volume 16, Number 1
UPdate
Progress, Trends, and Practices in Higher Education
Toward a Model for Capstone
Experiences: Mountaintops,
Magnets, and Mandates
Connie J. Rowles, Daphene Cyr Koch,
Stephen P. Hundley, Sharon J. Hamilton
C
APSTONE EXPERIENCES IN HIGHER EDUCATION ARE NOT A NEW PHENOMENON.
Indeed, for several decades, graduating seniors in a variety of disciplines from a
wide range of institutions have participated in a course, program, or activity designed to facilitate their transition to the real world beyond the academy. Students often
view capstones as a rite of passage, a metaphorical ticket to be punched, a requirement
to be met, or that last hoop through which to jump, while faculty and administrators may
view capstone experiences as a final opportunity to instill the values, knowledge, and
skills that are expected of graduates of the institution.
In recent years, capstones have grown in scope, importance, and necessity, as the result of institutions’ heightened sense of accountability for documenting student learning outcomes and their recognition that thoughtful reflection on lessons learned is part of
the foundation of lifelong learning. As such, capstone experiences are typically organized around one of two broad emphases in higher education: student development or
assessment.
When student development is emphasized, capstone experiences are designed to provide culminating experiences at the baccalaureate level. Such courses are often used to
facilitate transition from the undergraduate student role to the postbaccalaureate roles
of employee, graduate student, civic-minded community member, and/or lifelong learner.
With this approach, capstones place a high degree of importance on the opportunity for
students to engage in meaningful reflection, synthesize learning from personal, academic, and professional contexts, and plan for the future.
When assessment is emphasized, capstones are used in assessing program-level student learning outcomes. Essentially, capstones seek to answer the central questions:
What does the student know? What can the student do? What evidence suggests what
students know and can do? Results from capstones are aimed at improving instructional
practices, and capstones are frequently used to provide accountability and documentation
for a variety of audiences, including employers, accreditation officials, parents, and pol-
CONTENTS
ARTICLES
Toward a Model for Capstone
Experiences: Mountaintops,
Magnets, and Mandates
Connie J. Rowles,
Daphene Cyr Koch,
Stephen P. Hundley,
Sharon J. Hamilton
1
Editor’s Notes
Karen E. Black,
Stephen P. Hundley
3
A Multiplicity of Learning:
Capstones at Portland State
University
Terrel L. Rhodes,
Susan Agre-Kippenhan
4
Capstones and Quality:
The Culminating Experience
as Assessment
Billy Catchings
6
From Capstones to Touchstones:
Preparative Assessment and
Its Use in Teacher Education
Patricia Ann Brock
8
Assessing Students’ Moral
Awareness
James J. F. Forest, Bruce Keith
10
FEATURES
Call for Papers
7
Calendar
12
Resources
16
Assessment Update
Progress, Trends, and Practices
in Higher Education
January–February 2004
Volume 16, Number 1
Editor
Trudy W. Banta, vice chancellor for
planning and institutional improvement,
Indiana University–Purdue University
Indianapolis
Managing Editor
Karen Elaine Black, assistant to the
vice chancellor
Assistant Editor
Frances W. Oblander, educational
consultant
Consulting Editors
Peter T. Ewell, National Center for Higher
Education Management Systems
Thomas Anthony Angelo, University of Akron
T. Dary Erwin, James Madison University
Cecilia L. Lopez, Harold Washington
College
Marcia Mentkowski, Alverno College
Jeffrey A. Seybert, Johnson County
Community College
Peter J. Gray, United States Naval Academy
Gary R. Pike, Mississippi State University
Designer
Kerry Golemon Schwartz, Insight Out!
Assessment Update: Progress, Trends, and Practices in Higher Education (Print ISSN 1041-6099;
online ISSN 1536-0725 at Wiley Interscience,
www.interscience.wiley.com) is published bimonthly
by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company,
at Jossey-Bass, 989 Market St., San Francisco, CA
94103-1741. Periodicals Postage Paid at San Francisco, CA, and additional mailing offices. Subscriptions
are $120 per year. Back issues are available in limited
supply at $25 per issue. To order, phone toll-free (888)
378-2537 or fax (888) 481-2665. Visit our Web site at
www.josseybass.com. Postmaster: Send address
changes to Assessment Update, Jossey-Bass, 989
Market St., San Francisco, CA 94103-1741.
Copyright © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley
Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of any part of this work beyond that permitted by Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United
States Copyright Act without permission of the
copyright owner is unlawful. Requests for permission or further information should be addressed
to the Permissions Department, c/o John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 111 River St., Hoboken, NJ 07030;
(201) 748-8789, fax (201) 748-6326, www.wiley.
com/go/permissions.
2
icymakers. Finally, capstone experiences are typically used to facilitate integration of learning in the major and to connect that learning back to the institution’s general education
themes and purposes.
Our Journey Toward Capstones
Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), a large urban institution, has
been working on a campuswide framework for baccalaureate capstone experiences. The
challenge of developing a common approach to capstones is underscored by the history,
structure, and context of the institution. IUPUI, a thirty-four-year-old campus with tremendous programmatic diversity, serves nearly thirty thousand students and has 1,800 faculty.
More than twenty academic units range from the traditional humanities, arts, and sciences
to several professional schools (for example, in engineering, education, and business). Students are often first-generation college attendees; enter with varying levels of academic
preparedness; are primarily commuters; hold many adult social roles concurrent with their
enrollment in postsecondary education; and persist to degree completion well beyond the
typical four-to-six-year time frame that is common at most largely residential institutions
serving more traditional-age students.
This student and programmatic diversity is further complicated by IUPUI’s largely decentralized decision-making and budgeting approach. For example, the financial management system requires each academic unit to realize its own revenue streams (through
tuition, state appropriations, indirect cost recovery from grants and contracts, and development or fundraising efforts); pay its direct costs (for example, salaries); and pay for
shared central services (for example, library resources) through a university-mandated tax.
(continued on page 13)
Call for Contributions
The editor welcomes short articles and news items for Assessment Update. Guidelines
follow for those who would like to contribute articles on outcomes assessment in higher
education.
• Content: Please send an account of your experience with assessment in higher education. Include concrete examples of practice and results.
• Audience: Assessment Update readers are academic administrators, campus assessment
practitioners, institutional researchers, and faculty from a variety of fields. All types of
institutions are represented in the readership.
• Style: A report, essay, news story, or letter to the editor would be welcome. Limited
references can be printed; however, extensive tables cannot be included.
• Format: In addition to standard manuscripts, news may be contributed via letter, telephone, or fax (317) 274-4651. The standard manuscript format is a 60-space line with
25 lines per page. If word processing is used, please submit a 31⁄2" diskette and three
paper copies of your article. Word is preferred. Articles may also be sent to <kblack@
iupui.edu> as a Microsoft Word attachment.
• Length: Articles should be four to eight typed, double-spaced pages (1,000–
2,000 words). Short news items and content for the Calendar and Book Review sections may be 100–500 words in length. Annotations of recent publications for the Resources feature should be about 50–100 words long.
• Copyright: Articles shall not have been registered for copyright or published elsewhere
prior to publication in Assessment Update.
• Deadlines: Each issue is typically planned four months before its publication. Future
deadlines for submitting articles are April 1 (July–August 2004 issue), June 1
(September–October 2004 issue), and August 1 (November–December 2004 issue).
Please address mailed contributions and comments to Trudy W. Banta, Editor, Assessment
Update, Rm. 140 Administration Bldg., 355 N. Lansing St., Indianapolis, IN 46202-2896. ■
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
E
DITOR’S
NOTES
Capping Off the Curriculum
Karen E. Black, Stephen P. Hundley
2003 ASSESSMENT INSTIin Indianapolis, we were reminded of the wide array of assessment
methods and techniques in use. Our institute brought together faculty and administrators from institutions across the
country and around the world to share and
debate ideas. Many of these sessions took
assessment from the classroom to the program and institution levels. Trudy Banta
has urged faculty to take a second look at
“student work not just individually but
also collectively—across students in a
course, across sections of the same course,
and across courses in a disciplinary
major.” (Assessment Update, Volume 12,
Number 1, p. 3). Through capstone
courses, students take that second look at
their own learning throughout their college experiences, and during the course of
this look provide invaluable information
to faculty about the quality of instruction
and of programs.
In this issue, James J. F. Forest and
Bruce Keith describe the assessment of
moral awareness in the latest installation
of their series on assessment at West Point.
In addition, we are pleased to provide examples of institutions that are making the
leap from assessing individual students
in individual classrooms to assessing the
overall performance of students in a culminating experience: a capstone.
Drawing on their experiences in developing capstones that will accommodate the
disparate cultures of a large institution,
Connie J. Rowles, Daphene E. Cyr, Stephen P. Hundley, and Sharon J. Hamilton describe a three-pronged capstone framework
A
T THE
TUTE
used at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis: Mountaintops, Magnets, or Mandates. Their article presents
the three approaches to capstones and
gives examples of how each is used at
IUPUI. For extended examples, we can
look to the other articles in this issue.
If we use the framework developed in
the first article, we see that Portland State
University’s capstone experiences, de-
sessment approach that is designed to
serve as both a capstone and a touchstone. Through the use of journals, students identify their strengths and areas
for improvement based on the standards
set by discipline-specific accreditation associations and those articulated by city
and state officials. Clearly, the attention
given to the requirements of external con-
Through capstone courses, students take that second look
at their own learning throughout their college experiences,
and during the course of this look provide invaluable information
to faculty about the quality of instruction and of programs.
�
scribed by Terrel L. Rhodes and Susan
Agre-Kippenhan, provide an example of
the mountaintop type. Portland State has
organized cross-disciplinary capstones
that emphasize their campus mission to
serve the Portland community.
The magnet type is illustrated in the
experience at the University of Indianapolis, where capstones developed by
faculty in the Department of Communication provide a culminating experience.
Billy Catchings describes a capstone experience that brings students from six
areas of study together to work on portfolios and senior projects.
Finally, Patricia Ann Brock introduces
us to the Teacher Opportunity Corps at
Pace University in New York City, an as-
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
stituents makes this an example of the
mandate type of capstone experience.
As assessment of student learning increasingly moves beyond classroom-based
approaches, an emphasis on documenting
and describing learning outcomes at the
program level is needed. Options and approaches to capstone experiences abound,
and it is our hope that this issue of Assessment Update will give readers some
useful examples that provide models of effective practice from a variety of disciplines and institutions. ■
3
A Multiplicity of Learning:
Capstones at Portland State University
Terrel L. Rhodes, Susan Agre-Kippenhan
P
S TATE U NIVERSITY
(PSU) is a public university with
more than twenty-three thousand
students enrolled in 120 undergraduate,
master’s, and doctoral degree programs.
Located in downtown Portland, Oregon,
PSU is a nationally acclaimed leader in
community-based learning. The university’s position in the heart of Oregon’s
economic and cultural center enables
PSU students and faculty to apply scholarly theory to the real-world problems of
business and community organizations.
In the fall of 1994, the PSU faculty
initiated the revised general education
program, University Studies. The culmination of this four-year, interdisciplinary
general education program is the capstone requirement. Under the guidance of
PSU faculty members and community
partners, six-credit capstone courses provide community-based learning and give
interdisciplinary student teams an opportunity to apply what they have learned in
the major and in their other University
Studies courses to a challenge emanating
from the metropolitan community.
The capstone’s purposes are to cultivate in students crucial life abilities that
are important both academically and professionally and to allow them to establish
connections within the larger community,
developing strategies for analyzing and
addressing problems and working with
others trained in fields different from their
own. In the academic year 2002–03, Portland State offered more than 150 capstone courses that engaged some 2,500
students in community work in the PortORTLAND
4
land area. Each course concludes with
the creation of a summative product appropriate to the project. The capstone
offerings range from neighborhood revitalization efforts, work with the sheriff’s
office, graphic design, work with immigrant populations, numerous efforts in
schools, performance-based work, and
small business initiatives. The capstones
represent the involvement of every unit
on campus, including two graduate
schools and all the professional areas.
Capstone Assessment
Assessment has been an integral part of
the capstone courses since their inception
in 1997 and even in their earlier pilot
stage. Assessment has been both formative and summative and has encompassed
a number of different approaches. An
end-of-course evaluation has been employed consistently, as have other selfreport measures. The data from these efforts have informed practice and have
been valuable in program improvement.
In 2000, assessment of student work samples provided a more fully realized picture of the courses. This effort led to the
development of a common assignment, a
brief reflective essay that each student
writes to tie course experiences to a program goal. Comprehensive rubrics are
used to review the essays, and again, the
data collected have contributed to both
course and program improvement.
Assessment of capstone courses is particularly challenging because it is important to contextualize student learning and
present the complex multidimensional
projects in an accessible format. Assessment is concerned not just with end results but also with the process of learning.
Second, our assessment work grows from
findings that measuring the impact of service learning on students requires collecting data from multiple sources. Major
aspects of our multidimensional capstone
assessment are summarized below.
Student Focus Group. In 1999–2000,
students were asked about their experiences in working with their community
partners. It became apparent that some
classes had better working relationships
with the community partner than others.
In the classes where there were not good
working relationships, students felt that
the communication between the university, the faculty member, and the partner
needed to be improved. Students said that
good communication was a necessary
component of a successful capstone experience. In general, students felt somewhat prepared for their experience in the
community. Some students felt uncomfortable at the beginning, but as soon as
the expectations of them became clear,
they felt less so. The majority of students
said that the most important learning
experience of their class was completing
the community project. Students perceived that their contribution to the community was a direct application of what
they had learned in their assigned coursework. They felt that their contribution
benefited the community, and this was a
major highlight for them.
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
University Studies Goals and a
Common Assignment. In 2001–02, a
common assignment was implemented.
Students are asked to relate their learning
in their capstone course to the University
Studies goals. The assessment team agreed
on the following prompt: “Please write a
three-to-five page analysis summarizing
the ways you have gained experience with
one of the University Studies goals: communication, critical thinking, variety of
human experiences, and social/ethical
responsibility. Please focus on one goal,
using specific examples from your personal and team experiences with your
community partners, within-class discussions and course readings, or in completing your project.”
Because most students wrote about two
University Studies goals—communication
and the variety (diversity) of human
experience—these two goals formed the
basis of the rubrics created to assess the
goals. Early in the spring 2002 term, external reviewers agreed that the resulting
scores were lower than expected, but that
the common student assignment was a
valid way to assess student learning outcomes. Faculty agreed that it was necessary to (1) revise the language used in
the rubrics; (2) establish a program for
achieving interrater reliability; (3) make
the rubrics known to the students; (4) include assessment of students’ writing as
a component of the assignment; and (5)
use the University Studies writing rubrics
to assess the students’ writing ability
rather than the separate one that had been
developed for the capstones. The revised
common assignment was used during
2002–03; results are still being assessed.
Student Self-Reports. End-of-course
evaluations are collected in each capstone
course. Transfer students enter the University Studies program without having
the benefit of the more intensive foundational first year or two of the program that
introduces students to the philosophy and
goals of the general education program.
Thus, student evaluations of capstones
include the responses of many transfer
students whose exposure to the goals of
the program is limited. Nevertheless, the
responses of native and transfer students
have been quite similar. For example,
more than 60 percent of students indicated the following: “I will continue to
volunteer or participate in the community
after this course”; “the work I performed
in the community enhanced my ability to
communicate more effectively with multiple audiences”; “the community aspect
of the course helped me develop my
problem-solving skills”; “the various disciplines and majors of the students in the
class helped the team work together in
understanding the community issues represented in this capstone”; and “through
this course I was made aware of my
social and ethical responsibility to myself
and to others.” More than 70 percent indicated the following: “my participation in
this capstone helped me to connect what
I learned to real-life situations”; “I feel
that the community work I did through
this course benefited the community”; “I
felt a responsibility to meet the needs of
the community partner of this course”;
“students in this class had the opportunity
to discuss and reflect on our work in the
community and were able to connect this
with the assigned readings and other
course materials”; and “there was a reflective component to this course that
enhanced my understanding of my personal strengths and weaknesses.”
External Study of Capstones’ Impact on
Students. In one of the first scholarship
of teaching articles on the impact of University Studies in its beginning years, Collier (2000) compared a group of students
in the capstone courses with students who
had not participated in the University
Studies program with regard to their identities as students. He found that University Studies had indeed influenced the role
identification and self-concept of students
as students. He found that the capstone
experience served as a socialization agent
and that role identification occurred on all
four goal dimensions of the program, to
varying degrees. This study suggests that
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
students in the program experience growth
in the goal areas, as well as a more fundamental role definition change as leaders in
the broader community that may persist
after the students have graduated.
For the past four years, a professor in
the Graduate School of Education has
been conducting a post-capstone student
survey (Cress and Brubaker, 2003). Regarding capstone experiences in social
and ethical responsibility, the researcher
found that eight of ten students said they
believed the following: individuals can do
something to bring about changes in society; colleges have a responsibility
to prepare graduates to become engaged
community members; and communitybased learning courses help prepare
students for the real world. Finally, twothirds of students (67 percent) believed
that colleges should require students to
volunteer in order to graduate.
Overall, the data indicated that students
make significant educational gains from
the beginning to the end of the capstone
experience as a result of their communitybased learning experiences in capstone
courses. Specifically, as a result of participating in capstone courses, students reported gains in the following areas:
• Interpersonal skills
• Leadership ability
• Public speaking ability
• Tolerance of others with different
beliefs
• Knowledge of people from different
races or cultures
• Understanding of social issues
• Knowledge of how to make a difference in the community
• Desire to volunteer in the future
When the responses were examined in
relation to major demographic categories,
some interesting findings emerged, with
implications for faculty and program
providers. For example, older students
may be less likely to support the educational concept of community-based learning. Male students may be less likely to
want to discuss and negotiate controver(continued on page 12)
5
Capstones and Quality: The Culminating
Experience as Assessment
Billy Catchings
A
P ERHAPS NO
word in academe has loomed
more dauntingly than the muchfeared “A” word. Several years ago, my
institution embarked on its self-study for
North Central Association accreditation
with the issue of quality assessment linked
to outcomes ringing loudly in our collective ears. As Massy (2003) explains, defining quality in terms of outcomes means
describing student learning and its consequences. All academic units at the University of Indianapolis were faced with
the reality of demonstrating outcomesoriented evaluation of student learning.
The Department of Communication was
no exception. A few of the academic
units at our medium-sized private university of just under four thousand students
had already developed capstone experiences, prompted by the demands of professional certifications and licensures.
Departments in the College of Arts and
Sciences, however, had not yet begun to
achieve widespread compliance with the
capstone trend.
After an extensive audit of our curriculum in connection with the university
self-study, the communication faculty
agreed to implement a multifaceted senior project that would serve in two capacities: (1) as a culminating experience
wherein students would engage in reflective analysis of their education and (2) as
a quality assessment tool to satisfy the
standards of accreditation. The decision
to adopt a final project with a critical, reflective component coheres with the views
of Harris and Sansom (2000), who offer
6
SSESSMENT !
four academic applications of Schön’s
principles of reflective practice to facilitate faculty use of tacit knowledge and to
improve student learning and institutional
practices. I will briefly describe our capstone experience as a reflective practice,
explain its utility in assessment and improving quality, and identify some of the
challenges we have encountered and continue to address.
The Capstone: A Senior Project
The Department of Communication organizes its course of study into six major
areas: electronic media, journalism, human communication, public relations,
corporate communication, and sports information. Students select courses in their
major areas but are required to complete
a departmental core that introduces them
to all of the subdisciplines as well as to
the essential elements of research, writing, law, and practical application. We
wanted the senior project to be indicative
of and consistent with both the specialized and integrative nature of the undergraduate program. The planning produced
a one-credit-hour capstone experience
that includes the following elements:
• A Web-based course in which students
and instructor interact weekly and meet
as needed for eleven to twelve weeks
• Development of individual portfolios
that are submitted to a faculty jury
• Planning and deployment of a senior
event featuring individual presentations
adjudicated by faculty
The Web-Based Course. Despite some
initial reservations on the part of faculty
and staff, the on-line dimension of the
course proved satisfactory to both students and instructors. The course is administered on Blackboard, a class bulletin
board and chat room where students access the syllabus and, along with the
instructor, engage in weekly discussions.
Points are awarded based on regular participation in the on-line discussion. The
primary purpose of the interactions is to
provide a forum in which students seek
and exchange advice on the preparation
of their portfolio and their presentation.
The on-line discussions are also used to
plan the senior project event.
The Portfolio. Determining what the
portfolio should contain and how it would
be evaluated presented a challenge. At
first, faculty were quite ambitious in
regard to the contents. Ultimately, we
agreed on core submissions (cover letter,
résumé, and samples of expository or
critical writing) and representative works
reflecting accomplishments (manuscripts,
production tapes, news clippings, designs,
and so on) in the students’ major subdisciplines. Each submission must be prefaced with a written reflection that includes
the submission’s origin as well as a selfassessment of the learning it demonstrates. The reflective piece is intended to
distinguish the portfolio from a repository
or scrapbook, which would serve as a
mere collection of materials rather than
an assessment document. Portfolios are
distributed to a three-member faculty
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
jury, which employs collaborativelydeveloped criteria and rubrics for grading.
The Senior Project Event. During the online discussions, students swap ideas and
make final plans for the senior project
event. This aspect of the capstone is intended to foster collaborative planning and
teamwork as students design the agenda,
then plan, promote, and implement the
program. The centerpiece for the event is
a series of presentations given by students.
Students prepare and deliver speeches that
are designed to demonstrate competence
in topic development, technological support, and oral communication. The faculty
as jury evaluate and assign grades to the
presentations as well as the overall event.
The Senior Project as Assessment
The utility of the capstone experience in
assessing the quality of the Department of
Communication’s academic program has
been excellent. After completion of the senior project sequence and upon final grading of the portfolios, the presentations,
and the event, department faculty convene
to debrief and reflect on the quality of the
senior project. Ultimately, the discussions
reveal connections (or disconnections) between the capstone and the department
course of study. Tagg (2003) notes,
“Characterizing the challenge of alignment isn’t the same thing as meeting the
challenge, but it is probably a useful first
step” (p. 284).
Each spring at the department review
and planning retreat, faculty devote substantial time to developing strategies for
improvement based on evaluations of the
senior project. The issues of alignment
among curriculum, learning, and the capstone have prompted concerted efforts to
improve the quality of both the curriculum
and the capstone. Among the changes that
have been implemented are the following:
• Redesign of department core curriculum
courses in order to reinforce expectations in writing and oral communication
• Standardization of syllabi to identify
work in courses that satisfies portfolio
requirements
• Introduction of faculty consultations
with seniors regarding topics for student
presentations
The preceding examples illustrate a
few of our efforts to address what Tagg
(2003) describes as the misalignment of
existing structures. Addressing points of
misalignment has been our greatest challenge in maintaining and improving the
capstone experience. Initially, I believe,
we envisioned and designed the capstone
as a disembodied performance without
deeply exploring the extent of its alignment with student learning. Disappointments and dissatisfactions with portfolios
and presentations heralded the reality that
there exist points of incongruence that
must be addressed continually. We were
and still are faced with the need to honestly identify how well our students have
learned what we think we have taught
them. We have had to consider how capable they are in demonstrating or performing that learning in a culminating
and synthesizing experience. The Senior
Project has enlightened and discouraged
us but has ultimately reinforced our resolve to address misalignment. To borrow
from Tagg (2003) again, our commitment
to aligning the capstone with student
learning is one realization of our pledge
to strive for quality improvement and systematic integrity. ■
References
Harris, J., and Sansom, D. Discerning Is
More Than Counting. AALE Occasional Papers in Liberal Education, no.
3. Washington, D.C.: American Academy for Liberal Education, 2000.
Massy, W. F. Honoring the Trust: Quality and Cost Containment in Higher
Education. Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 2003.
Tagg, J. The Learning Paradigm College.
Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 2003.
Call for Papers
The 16th International Conference
on Assessing Quality in Higher Education will be held July 12–14,
2004 in Glasgow/Edinburgh, Scotland. The conference is sponsored by
Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis and hosted by Caledonian Conferences, Scotland.
The purposes of this conference
series are to enable participants to
(1) gain knowledge of current issues
and practices in assessment of quality in higher education worldwide,
and (2) interact with leaders in the
field of quality assessment.
The conference language is English. Proposals for posters, papers,
contributions to panel sessions or
workshops will be refereed. Proposals must be submitted by February
27, 2004. Accepted abstracts, planning papers, and all other papers
submitted will be provided to delegates on a CD-ROM.
To submit a proposal, please send
a brief abstract (250-word maximum)
for the program and a more detailed
one- to two-page proposal further
explaining your topic in Word format
on a disk or in an e-mail to:
Trudy W. Banta
Vice Chancellor for Planning and
Institutional Improvement
Indiana University–Purdue
University Indianapolis
355 N. Lansing Street, AO 140
Indianapolis, IN 46202–2896
E-mail: <[email protected]>
Billy Catchings is associate professor
and chair of the Department of Communication at the University of Indianapolis.
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
7
From Capstones to Touchstones:
Preparative Assessment and Its Use
in Teacher Education
Patricia Ann Brock
A
SSESSMENT OF TEACHER COM-
ing new teachers when they ask, “Where
do I go from here?”
petence follows current educational trends in rubrics, standards,
and high-stakes testing. Simultaneously,
the traditional preservice education classroom is expanding into cyberspace; many
teacher preparation programs are being
offered through distance learning. As
preservice education students complete
Portfolio Review as a Summative
Capstone Assessment
While standardized testing is an increasingly required summative teacher education assessment, a “snapshot of a single
Future teachers need to know more than educational theories
and classroom practices once they leave their colleges or universities;
they need professional touchstones.
�
required courses and classroom apprenticeships, they gain confidence and competence as future teachers; however, their
new professional abilities must be measured objectively, which is especially challenging in on-line environments.
Amid a growing reliance on standardized test scores, another valuable assessment tool, the capstone experience,
continues to grow in popularity. However,
future teachers need to know more than
educational theories and classroom practices once they leave the ivy-covered walls
of their colleges or universities; they need
professional touchstones. While capstones
indicate and celebrate successful pedagogic conclusions, they should not be
ends in themselves but should also be perceived as touchstones that identify stages
of teacher professional development, guid-
8
performance,” the more valuable capstone activity, portfolio assessment, represents “progress over time” (Borman
and Levine, 1997). Portfolios are not voluminous scrapbooks of favorite memorabilia but rather are selected collections
of preservice teachers’ teaching samples,
illustrating understanding of their pedagogical progress through the academic
program course requirements and classroom experiences.
A portfolio is a systematically organized “collection of evidence used by the
student and teacher to monitor growth”
(Shapely and Bush, 1999). For a preservice teacher capstone activity, a portfolio
should provide future teachers the opportunity to “demonstrate their ability to impact student learning and to reflect on
their own learning” (Bennett, 2003, p. 6).
Emporia State University calls the portfolio a Teacher Work Sample (Bennett,
2003). Portfolio selections include instructional units and methods of assessment that were analyzed by preservice
teachers, then developed and integrated
into their teaching internships. Frequently, preservice teachers are encouraged to
align their accomplished competences
with the standards of the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
(NCATE).
As more portfolios link rubrics, goals,
and standards with samples of demonstrated successful academic and professional study, portfolios are growing in
size and weight. Because of portfolios’
complexity and comprehensiveness, new,
efficient recording tools—electronic
portfolios—are needed. Through the use
of generic or customized software, preservice teachers can digitally create
professional portfolios that are easily
transportable as CD-ROMs. To facilitate
review by professionals who are often
geographically scattered, portfolios can
also be shared through institutional servers, the World Wide Web, or DVD technologies.
Portfolios are professionally reviewed
archival collections of classroom successes
and clinical supervision experiences that
provide foundations for future inservice directions. However, more emphasis must be placed on developing independent preservice teacher self-assessment
and professional self-monitoring of the
real-world experience after graduation.
This is known as preparative assessment,
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
and one model has been created and implemented in an undergraduate preservice
teaching program at Pace University in
New York City.
Preparative Assessment:
Capstone and Touchstone
At the Center for Urban Education at Pace
University, a special educational mentoring program called the Teacher Opportunity Corps (TOC) emphasizes the role of
preparative assessment as both a capstone
and a touchstone. Education majors, as
well as the education-related majors in
speech pathology and child psychology,
are invited to enter the TOC program.
Through weekly service learning classroom experiences in challenging inner-city
schools, college students assist classroom
teachers or speech pathology or counseling faculty.
Most college students enter the TOC
program as sophomores and continue
through their first year of teaching or counseling. Throughout their TOC experience,
students learn to reflect on their professional growth.
TOC students are required to preassess and post-assess themselves annually, using Likert scales for professional
and personal characteristics and for teacher and professional skills to identify their
strengths and areas for professional improvement. The scales are aligned with
NCATE, state, and city standards. After
each weekly service learning experience,
students record their experiences in a
journal and assess their classroom progress on self-selected characteristics and
professional skills. They also identify educational issues and concerns, as well as
pedagogic classroom discoveries. TOC
students’ interactions with their students
and teachers at the school site are observed by a TOC clinical supervisor. Their
self-assessments, weekly journal reports,
and clinical observations are collected in
portfolio files.
At the conclusion of each academic
year, TOC students prepare for closure
conferences with their mentors and their
clinical supervisors. Students begin the
process by reviewing their portfolio files,
analyzing and synthesizing patterns, and
evaluating their own professional progress. During these conferences, they provide self-monitoring suggestions to
improve their professional development
as they prepare for the next classroom experience. This process exemplifies preparative assessment as both capstone and
touchstone.
forming summative (past) and formative
(current) capstone assessments into selfreflective preparative (future) assessments,
preservice teachers can be better prepared
to meet the evolving challenges of schools.
By using technology to enhance learning
experiences, such questions as How am I
doing? and How can I be a better teacher?
can be answered more confidently and
more accurately. Successful capstones are,
then, extended to serve as professional
touchstones. ■
Reflections on the TOC Preparative
Assessment Model
References
Bennett, P. “A New Approach to Performance Assessment.” Quality Teaching,
Spring 2003, 11(2), 6–8. Also available
at www.ncate.org/pubs/qt_s03.pdf.
Accessed Aug. 28, 2003.
Borman, S., and Levine, J. A Practical
Guide to Elementary Instruction from
Plan to Delivery. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon, 1997.
Shapely, K. S., and Bush, J. M. “Developing a Valid and Reliable Portfolio
Assessment in the Primary Grades:
Building on Practical Experience.”
Applied Measurement in Education,
1999, 12(2), 111–132.
Some valuable lessons have been learned
during this three-year model.
• TOC students, like many preservice
education students, need guidance and
encouragement to develop the critical
skills to assess their own professional
progress. Traditionally, teachers, professors, or supervisors have formulated
most formative and summative assessments of students’ progress. Because of
these past experiences, TOC students
need training and practice to build confidence and competence in professional
self-assessment; it cannot be assumed
that students will acquire these skills
through academic osmosis alone.
• Computer technology, especially e-mail,
provides an important communication
link between mentor, clinical supervisor, and TOC students; informal conferencing is frequent, often daily. TOC
newsletters are now e-newsletters.
• A collegial portfolio file sharing session
is planned for TOC graduates in May
2004.
• Electronic portfolio files on CDs are
being planned and will be implemented
as our access to technology increases. A
pilot study will be performed this year.
Patricia Ann Brock is director of
Teacher Opportunity Corps and the
Teacher/Leadership Quality Program
at the Center for Urban Education
in the School of Education at Pace
University in New York City.
Conclusion
All in-service teaching paths are informed
by personal and professional decisions
made through reflecting on past performances and future possibilities. By trans-
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
9
Assessing Students’ Moral Awareness
James J. F. Forest, Bruce Keith
T
U NITED S TATES M ILITARY
Academy (USMA) provides cadets
with a liberal education designed
to develop versatile and critical thinkers
who can adapt to the professional and
ethical challenges they will confront.
Cadets’ moral development is integrated
throughout their West Point experience,
to the point of being included as one of
the USMA’s academic program goals.
HE
The Learning Model
Moral awareness requires one to be cognitively attentive to the presence of moral
issues and adept at developing options in
response to these issues. The framework
for developing a cadet’s moral awareness
is derived from four statements that describe our expectations for their abilities
at graduation. In particular, USMA graduates should be able to demonstrate
understanding and proficiency in the
identification and examination of moral
implications related to various situations;
rationally analyze specific ethical responses to moral problems; recognize
moral issues that arise in their units and
help others to gain an understanding of
these issues; and work to strengthen the
moral respectability of the Army.
Drawn from this framework is a
learning model that reflects a curricular
structure, a developmental process, and
relevant content, which we have integrated
throughout the core curriculum to ensure
that cadets are engaged in moral discourse.
Within the ubiquitous domain of moral
awareness at West Point, the academic
10
program outlines a three-part structure that
incorporates (1) recognition—learning to
identify, describe, and analyze moral issues; (2) moral considerations—grappling
with ethical options, counterarguments,
validity, soundness, reasonableness, and
implications of competing views; and
(3) application in decision making—
demonstrating cogency, coherence, and
consistency of ethical considerations in the
moral issue under discussion.
The learning model also articulates a
process that describes how cadets proceed through this structure—that is, the
various developmental challenges we
place before them. Cadets’ initial discussions about issues of moral significance
center on recognition of the issue, the
offer the greatest merit. The developmental structure of the learning model ensures
that cadets encounter these questions sequentially through coursework in the core
curriculum and the major programs.
Within the context of these learning
experiences, the academic curriculum at
West Point places considerable emphasis on moral and ethical development.
Courses in philosophy, general psychology, and military leadership develop
cadets’ understanding of the language,
arguments, and methods of moral discourse. Additional core courses provide
cadets with opportunities to recognize
and respond to moral imperatives within
political, legal, and economic dimensions
of behavior. These courses, combined
The learning model reflects a curricular structure, a developmental
process, and relevant content, which we have integrated throughout the
core curriculum to ensure that cadets are engaged in moral discourse.
�
various moral considerations, and the
ways in which ethical responses affect
decision making. These discussions incorporate moral motivation, emphasizing
why cadets ought to act ethically. As they
advance in their understanding of moral
and ethical issues, cadets confront the argumentative nature of moral discourse,
seeking out the facts of the case, the moral
considerations that apply to the facts, and
the morally acceptable responses that
with their leadership experiences in military applications, encourage cadets to
engage in critical thinking, the study of
ethical theories, and analysis of moral issues, especially those involving war and
the role of society in war. These learning
experiences also focus on the leader’s influence on individuals and examine the
uses of law, the limits of law, the role of
law in society, and the distinction between legality and morality. Through this
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
combination of structure, process, and
content, the USMA’s faculty have designed
and implemented a learning model that
seeks to ensure a high level of moral and
ethical situational awareness among our
graduates.
Outcomes Assessment
The Moral Awareness Goal Team, a multidisciplinary group of faculty, maintains
principal ownership of the design and assessment of this goal. Their work is supported and reviewed by faculty through
the Assessment Steering Committee and
the dean. To assess cadets’ achievement of
the moral awareness goal, this goal team
has developed a rubric to represent the
standard of performance we expect cadets
to achieve. Our assessment initiatives seek
to determine the extent to which graduates
have reached this standard—namely, their
ability to reflect on the moral implications
of situations they encounter on and off
duty; to examine the consequences of various responses to moral problems in terms
of logical consistency and conduciveness
to the success of a mission; to work with
others to find reasoned, ethical solutions
to problems; and, recognizing their own
fallibility, to refine their moral sensibility
continually and to share their insights
with fellow soldiers openly.
Our assessment of the moral awareness goal involves a triangulation of data,
including an analysis of survey responses,
student course products, and employer
feedback. Our review of longitudinal survey data reveals that cadets’ confidence in
their achievement of the moral awareness
goal increases significantly during their
four-year experience at West Point, particularly when they are asked to describe
their ability to “recognize moral issues in
a military situation” and “select morally
justifiable actions.” Additional assessment
evidence, to be provided by content analyses of written essays, research papers,
formal presentations, and other course
products, will offer other perspectives on
cadets’ achievement of this goal.
Surveys administered to USMA grad-
uates and their employers (typically unit
field commanders) consistently reveal that
both the graduates and their commanders
are confident in our graduates’ abilities to
recognize ethical issues and demonstrate
morally appropriate decision-making strategies. Furthermore, cadets, graduates,
and their commanders consistently report a level of achievement for the moral
awareness goal that surpasses that associated with any other goal in the academic program. In addition, the assessment
evidence we gather through focus group
interviews of former battalion commanders suggests that USMA graduates routinely consider the moral imperatives of
their own actions and of those within
their units.
The Military Academy has spent the
past several years working through an iterative process to assess cadets’ achievement of the moral awareness goal. Our
analysis of the assessment data gathered
through these activities indicates that
USMA graduates perform very well on
the moral and ethical dimension of the
overarching academic program goal of
enabling graduates to anticipate and respond effectively to the uncertainties of a
changing technological, social, political,
and economic world. Furthermore, we
are convinced that these efforts are yielding positive results, in terms of improving our curriculum and moving USMA
toward an academic culture of long-term
assessment renewal. Nonetheless, we have
not reached and perhaps will not reach an
end state; we are learning valuable lessons
as we move forward with this initiative.
Annual analyses of the data we have
gathered have led us to revise questionnaire items and the overall assessment
process. Perhaps one of the most important lessons learned thus far is that assessment is a process—a continual cycle
of gathering information, assessing it, examining the methodological issues, refining the instruments, and then gathering
more information. In addition, we have
learned the importance of annually gathering evidence from multiple sources, including cadets’ coursework and opinions
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
as well as the views of graduates and employers.
Conclusion
West Point affords cadets the intellectual
and ethical development necessary to succeed as military officers. Effective leadership of troops across a broad spectrum of
Army operations requires a thorough understanding of moral and ethical issues.
The assessment data we have gathered to
date suggests that USMA cadets and
graduates generally achieve the standard
we have set for the moral awareness goal.
We find that the attention we are giving to
a comprehensive assessment process, directed by multidisciplinary goals and
teams of faculty, is resulting in positive
qualitative change in our academic program and curriculum. In our next article,
we will focus on another of these academic program goals: developing the math
and science skills of West Point cadets. ■
James J. F. Forest ([email protected])
is assistant professor and assistant dean
for academic assessment and Bruce
Keith ([email protected]) is professor
and associate dean for academic affairs
at the United States Military Academy,
West Point, New York.
11
Multiplicity
(continued from page 5)
sial issues. Students of color may have a
difficult time seeing how they personally
can create change. Data over the four years
were impressively consistent.
Conclusion
Assessing capstone courses has been exciting but challenging. We are constantly gathering information both about the
courses and about the assessment process.
Reflecting on the process has yielded some
valuable lessons. We have encountered
notable pitfalls, come up with some successful strategies, and have lessons that
we can share with others.
In regard to pitfalls and challenges,
we note that with a program as varied as
the capstone program at Portland State
University, it is difficult to create one set
of common expectations; however, having common expectations greatly simplifies assessment. Likewise, it is difficult to
use just one assessment approach. As with
all assessment, it must be meaningful to
faculty and students, and in this case, program assessment must be aligned with
other course goals.
Our successful strategies are in some
ways corollaries of our pitfalls. Capstone
assessment is most successful when program assessment and course goals align.
We need variety and flexibility in our ap-
C
ALENDAR
March 4–6, 2004: General Education
and Assessment: Generating Commitment, Value, and Evidence, sponsored
by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) will
be held in Long Beach, California. This
conference will focus on defining and
assessing key outcomes of twenty-firstcentury general education programs
designed to prepare students for work
and life in an increasingly diverse,
complex, and interconnected global
society. For more information, visit the
AAC&U’s Web site at <http://www.
aacu.org/meetings/generaleducation/
index.cfm>.
April 12–16, 2004: The 85th Annual
Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, “Enhancing the
Visibility and Credibility of Educational Research,” will be held in San
Diego, California. This year, there are
three subthemes: Brown v. Board of
Education—50 Years Later; Teacher
12
Learning and Development; and Justifying Evidence-Based Claims. For
more information, visit the American
Educational Research Association’s
Web site at <http://www.aera.net/>.
May 30–June 2, 2004: The 2004 Annual AIR Forum, “The Information
Revolution: Bridging the Past to the
Future,” will be held in Boston. Covering a wide range of topics, forum
programming is organized into the following five tracks: Student Life and
Learning; Academic Programs, Curriculum, and Faculty Issues; Institutional Management and Planning;
Higher Education Collaborations, Policy Issues, and Accountability; and
The Practice of Institutional Research:
Theory, Techniques, Technologies,
Tools, and Ethics. For more information, visit the Web site of the Association for Institutional Research at <http://
www.airweb.org/>. ■
We need variety and flexibility in our approaches to address the needs of the specific capstone project experiences. And
while we want to accommodate the individual needs of the course, we need
consistency of language about goals for
student learning and course objectives in
order to draw conclusions across the program and develop assessment tools that
can be applied to multiple courses.
We have some lessons that we can
share as well. Capstone assessment is
messy, with many fits and starts, and
lengthy, with each successive plan drawing on the one before it. It is clear that
multiple approaches, both qualitative and
quantitative, are needed. A workable assessment process needs faculty participation at all stages and in all aspects of
development, implementation, and analysis. We need to pay close attention to
student context and consistent studentcentered language. And while the assessment process is valuable in measuring
personal development, there is a need for
multiple pedagogies and strategies to address the specific needs of student populations differentiated on the basis of race,
ethnicity, gender, and age.
Our lessons, strategies, and pitfalls
have a common finding. We have seen
the value of the program assessment approach in helping us gather aggregate
data to enhance student learning as well
as in extending the value of the individual courses, projects, and student experiences. ■
References
Collier, P. J. “The Effects of Completing
a Capstone Course on Student Identity.”
Sociology of Education, Oct. 2000, 73,
285–299.
Cress, C. M., with Brubaker, T. “2002–
2003 Capstone Student Assessment.”
Unpublished manuscript, Aug. 2003.
Terrel L. Rhodes is vice provost for
curriculum and undergraduate studies
and Susan Agre-Kippenhan is chair
and professor of art at Portland State
University.
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
Model
(continued from page 2)
General education at IUPUI is, arguably, a double-edged sword. While
many campuses have developed a traditional course-based approach to general
education, in which students enroll in specific courses to fulfill the requirements of
a well-rounded college curriculum, IUPUI
developed a principles-based approach to
general education. With this approach,
there is no course distribution requirement
for general education. Instead, each academic unit—and each program therein—
must define how each specific course
emphasizes one or more of the principles
of undergraduate learning (PULs) (core
communication and quantitative skills;
critical thinking; integration and application of knowledge; intellectual depth,
breadth, and adaptiveness; understanding
society and culture; and values and ethics).
The strength of the principles-based approach is the overarching responsibility
that faculty in all disciplines and at all levels of the undergraduate experience have
for integrating and reinforcing the PULs.
Indeed, at campuses where general education is handled through specific course
sequences, there is a tendency to marginalize it and to have faculty in specific disciplines become, perhaps unintentionally,
dissociated from the institution’s general
education themes. One drawback of the
principles-based approach to general education is a lack of common experiences
in which all undergraduates participate,
regardless of major. This drawback is especially evident when capstone experiences are envisioned, since there is not a
common set of courses in general education with which the capstone experiences
can be readily aligned.
Against this backdrop of diversity, decentralization, and dispersed general education, our campus has been on a journey
to more fully develop capstone experiences that encompass both the student development and assessment emphases,
while remaining somewhat flexible in their
implementation. Capstone experiences are
the natural evolution of the work that has
been done at IUPUI relative to general
education, retention, student learning
communities, and first-year experience
efforts, among other initiatives. In 2002,
a faculty learning community, made up of
faculty representing the range of academic units on our campus, was organized to
conceptualize a campuswide approach
to capstone experiences. The group was
charged with developing models of capstones that captivate, encapsulate, synthesize, and demonstrate learning at the
baccalaureate level and with providing
guidance to faculty on the purposes, pedagogical approaches, and options for capstone experiences.
Organizing Model for Capstones
Recognizing the institutional context in
which capstone experiences would be organized, the faculty learning community
quickly identified several assumptions
that would guide its efforts. First, there
could be no overly prescriptive plan for
capstone experiences, given the programmatic diversity of the campus. Second, the
culture, values, structure, and financial
operations of the campus support decentralized, discipline-based decision making, and these conditions would need to
be respected in the development of capstones. Third, great effort should be undertaken to make explicit to faculty and
administrators why capstones are important and how they connect to existing
institutional initiatives. Finally, the principles of undergraduate learning should
form the basis for activities that occur in
capstone experiences. In light of these assumptions, the Mountaintops, Magnets,
or Mandates organizing model for capstone experiences was developed. While
it may be argued that a capstone experience rarely falls exclusively into one of
the three approaches, faculty members
are strongly encouraged to choose one
principal approach for organizing their
capstone experience.
Mountaintops refer to capstone experiences that are interdisciplinary or mul-
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
tidisciplinary, in which students from two
(or more) disparate majors ascend to the
capstone experience from different, unique
disciplinary perspectives, coming together at the summit; essentially, this is a capstone experience that makes use of the
rich diversity of disciplines. An example
of a mountaintop capstone experience at
our institution comes from the disparate
disciplines of English and computer technology. Faculty from two senior-level
capstone classes engaged both groups of
students in a team-taught, interdisciplinary capstone entitled Multimedia Projects in English. Students in English were
paired with computer technology students
to envision, develop, present, and evaluate Web-based projects, cross-pollinating
one another’s learning with their respective disciplinary expertise. This capstone
mirrored the approach in real-world organizational settings, in which individuals from differing points of view must
work together and apply specific expertise in the execution of a project.
While the English and computer technology example highlights two distinctly
different disciplines, another example of
a mountaintop experience is the capstone
class for the Construction Technology Department’s Bachelor of Science degree,
in which subdisciplines exist under the
broader disciplinary umbrella. Students
in the capstone course are from two different tracks, Civil Engineering Technology (CET) and Architectural Technology
(ART). During their capstone, groups of
three or four students initiate, organize,
and present a construction project, utilizing the strengths of the ART students in
drawing and the CET students in scientific analysis.
Magnets refer to capstone experiences
that are discipline-specific and that, like
a magnet attracting precious metal, pull
together the richness of content from the
discipline in a summative manner. An example of a magnet capstone from our
campus occurs in organizational leadership. The capstone experiences occur in
two separate classes: a professional development capstone, in which students,
13
among other activities, participate in a
leadership assessment center, complete
a comprehensive exam drawn from core
course content, and develop a reflection
paper on general education; and a research
capstone, in which students propose a research topic, conduct a literature review,
collect and analyze data, interpret and summarize results, develop conclusions and
recommendations, and present findings to
decision makers in the form of a thesis and
multimedia presentation. In this discipline,
the two capstone experiences serve as a
magnet that pulls together concepts in a
summative manner through products that
demonstrate student learning.
Finally, mandates refer to capstone experiences that are organized around meeting the needs of an external constituency,
typically when licensure, certification, or
other circumstances require that competences be mastered and demonstrated in a
summative manner. The School of Nursing provides a good example of the mandates approach; students are expected to
demonstrate baccalaureate program outcomes in a clinical setting during the last
four weeks of their program of study. Students are matched one to one with a staff
nurse in a clinical setting, and the students’ clinical hours are the same as those
of the staff nurses’ regular work hours.
The capstone experience lets the School of
Nursing document the effectiveness of the
curriculum, ensures that minimum levels
of professional competence are mastered
and demonstrated, and provides students
with a realistic preview of a work setting.
Keys to, Options for,
and Pedagogical Practices
in the Capstone Experience
To help students and faculty maximize
capstone effectiveness, we outline several
keys to capstone experiences. These keys
reflect the philosophical underpinnings inherent in fulfilling the student development
and assessment components of capstones
and also acknowledge the pragmatic issues
that must be identified and addressed in
order to implement capstone experiences.
14
First, capstone experiences should be
a culminating set of personal, academic,
and professional experiences, and as such,
the primary focus of capstone experiences
should be on the synthesis, integration, or
application of previously acquired knowledge rather than on the acquisition of
new knowledge or skills. Second, the rationale for organizing the approach to
capstones (mountaintops, magnets, or
mandates) should be based largely on the
of-class and cocurricular experiences;
service learning and community-based
learning; college-to-work and career transition experiences, such as internships or
informational interviewing; and metacognitive aspects of student learning, including development of portfolios of student
work with opportunities for review and
reflection.
However capstone experiences are
structured, the pedagogical approaches
Capstone experiences should be a culminating set of personal,
academic, and professional experiences, and as such, the primary
focus of capstone experiences should be on the synthesis,
integration, or application of previously acquired knowledge
rather than on the acquisition of new knowledge or skills.
�
specific needs of the discipline. Third, the
capstone experience should be situated
near the end of the program of study,
should be required in order to graduate,
and should not necessarily be thought of
as just a single course. Fourth, capstone
experiences should be facilitated, mentored, or coordinated by full-time faculty,
thus ensuring that general education
themes and discipline-specific requirements are addressed with reasonable
consistency. Finally, student ownership,
responsibility, and engagement should be
central to capstones, with ample opportunity for discussion, reflection, and demonstration of general education principles.
Faculty have several options for developing comprehensive, robust learning
experiences. As mentioned earlier, capstones can be organized as an interdisciplinary course (mountaintops), as a
major-based or discipline-based course
that pulls together learning from the program of study (magnets), or as a course
or series of activities that permits students
to demonstrate their applied knowledge
relative to an external requirement or
competence (mandates). Beyond specific
courses, however, capstones should also
be thought to include and encompass out-
necessary for student enjoyment and success depend on the presence of several of
the following factors: collaborative learning; self-directed learning; problem-based
learning; and other learner-centered instructional strategies that encourage critical thinking, integration, reflection, and
synthesis. Indeed, activities and assignments in capstone experiences should
compel students to use higher-order skills.
Faculty Involvement
and Development
Engaging faculty in the student development and assessment functions of capstones requires creative, sustainable
approaches to faculty development. Indeed, at IUPUI, we have established a
capstone faculty learning community,
wherein faculty roles and capstone goals
can be explored and discussed in a nonthreatening environment. This faculty
learning community has enabled faculty
to share resources, engage in peer review
of teaching, and undertake classroombased research on capstones.
Central to the occasional faculty resistance to required models for capstones
was the notion of academic freedom, a
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
concept fundamental to higher education.
Academic freedom, while the cornerstone
of intellectual activity in academia, is also
variously and sometimes loosely interpreted, occasionally to the detriment of
the establishment of curricular policies intended to achieve specific kinds of learning or assessment of that learning. Once
again, the implications are evident for
faculty development. It is important to
create an environment in which faculty
can share their ideas openly and freely and
can learn how their colleagues with equal
claim to academic freedom can nonetheless work within faculty-developed curricular policies. Even with the increased
and sustained focus on assessment, some
faculty are still uncomfortable with articulating and documenting achievement in
student learning outcomes. When the
capstone is identified as a site for assessing program effectiveness, the need to
develop specific measures of learning
achievement at the program level may
serve as a barrier to faculty wishing to
teach a capstone course.
Further challenges lie in the scheduling
and resource requirements for capstones.
Small departments sometimes cannot spare
a faculty member from the requirements
of the major to teach a capstone. Large departments with subdisciplines often create
a separate capstone for each subdiscipline,
with benefits in terms of depth of understanding in the subdiscipline but potential
liability in terms of a decreased understanding of the discipline as a whole.
Some departments design applied capstones that draw heavily on technological,
travel, or other kinds of resources. A desire to develop interdisciplinary capstones
compounds the scheduling and resource
problems, with concerns about which department will receive the credit-hour resources for a given course.
Finally, in a large and comprehensive
institution such as IUPUI, institutionalizing capstones and tying them to assessment processes and practices is, quite
simply, very difficult, particularly if there
is any desire to go beyond assessment at
the department level. At various times,
IUPUI has explored the notion of a liberal arts capstone, an undergraduate capstone, and a liberal arts and sciences
capstone. For all the reasons listed elsewhere in this article, none of these has
come to fruition. That is not to say, however, that such program-level capstones
are impossible. Other campuses, such as
Portland State University, have organized
cross-disciplinary capstones around their
campus mission to serve their community
and have described their work elsewhere
in this issue of Assessment Update. As the
culture of IUPUI continues to integrate
the principles of undergraduate learning
across the curriculum and continues to
encourage faculty learning communities
as open forums of discussion, opportunities for integration and collaboration
across disciplines increase each year.
Assessment Update
Collections provide information on specific
areas of assessment in
a single, easy-to-use
booklet ($14.95). To
order your copy of the first Assessment
Update Collections booklet—Portfolio Assessment: Uses, Cases, Scoring, and
Impact—call (888) 378-2537 or visit
www.josseybass.com. For information on
bulk discounts, call Lora Templeton at (415)
782-3127.
Conclusion
Capstones provide an ideal opportunity to
identify, assess, and document what students are learning and how effectively
they can apply what they have learned to
the problems facing them and society. To
be sure, life’s assessment strategies are
far more challenging than any devised by
higher education. The capstone is the inevitable site for determining, in part, how
effectively students are equipped to meet
those challenges. ■
Connie J. Rowles is clinical associate
professor in the School of Nursing,
Daphene Cyr Koch is assistant professor of construction technology in the
School of Engineering and Technology,
Stephen P. Hundley is associate professor of organizational leadership and
supervision in the School of Engineering and Technology, and Sharon J.
Hamilton is associate dean of the faculties for integrating learning, and Chancellor’s Professor, all at IUPUI.
Assessment Update • January–February 2004 • Volume 16, Number 1
15
R
ESOURCES
Biggs, J. Teaching for Quality Learning
at University. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2003.
This work was written to serve as a
guide for college and university faculty
and instructors who are looking for ways
to improve their teaching and their students’ learning. It is also applicable to
administrators who are involved in
teaching-related decisions. The work has
three chapters devoted specifically to
assessment. Chapter Three focuses on
setting the parameters for assessment,
determining objectives, creating clear definitions of terms, and deciding on methods that would be most appropriate for
the goals the instructor wishes to assess.
Chapters Eight and Nine provide indepth instruction on purposes for assessment, related terms, and commonly used
methods. This work gives instructors new
to assessment a good foundation while
still providing information pertinent to
the most experienced practitioner.
Massy, W. F. Honoring the Trust: Quality and Cost Containment in Higher Education. Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 2003.
This book ties together the work that
William Massy has been conducting on
reforming higher education and provides
a practical program for improvement that
can be implemented without spending
more or abandoning other priorities. The
author strives to achieve three major
goals: (1) to describe and document issues facing higher education; (2) to offer
solutions; and (3) to provide practical
guidance for change agents. Massy examines the roles that performance indicators and student learning assessment
play in (1) evaluating the quality of education, (2) determining the funding that
the institution will devote to specific programs, and (3) addressing state and federal mandates for assessment-driven
funding. The book illustrates the importance of assessment in examining quality and cost issues in higher education.
Tagg, J. The Learning Paradigm College. Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 2003.
This work builds on the article that
John Tagg wrote with Robert Barr entitled, “From Teaching to Learning: A
New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education,” which appeared in Change
magazine in 1995. Tagg bases his work
on the assumption that people do not
know how to view their own institution
or their own work. He contends that it is
time to view universities and colleges
through a new lens. The goal of the work
is that readers will begin to view higher
education in terms of the underlying
functional relationships of core
Periodicals
Postage Paid at
San Francisco, CA,
and additional
mailing offices
0-7879-7480-3
Artzt, A. F. and Armour-Thomas, E.
Becoming a Reflective Mathematics
Teacher: A Guide for Observations and
Self-Assessment. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum, 2002.
This guide is part of the Studies in
Mathematics Thinking and Learning
series and is most helpful to beginning
mathematics teachers, including those
who are student teaching. The authors believe that novice teachers can improve
their craft by participating in a meaningful exercise of reflection and selfassessment. The authors provide guidance
for this process and believe that linking
practice and theory and reflecting on that
effort will lead to great teaching.