ASSURANCE OF LEARNING
This interpretive
information for the Assurance of Learning standards is organized differently
from the earlier standards. Rather than
material accompanying each standard, the interpretive
information is placed at the beginning of this section, and then the
standards are listed along with their respective “Basis for Judgment”
and “Guidance for Documentation.”
Student learning is the central activity of higher education. Definition of
learning expectations
and
assurance that graduates achieve learning expectations are key features of
any academic
program. The learning expectations derive from a balance of internal and
external
contributions to the definition of educational goals. Members of the
business community,
students, and faculty members each contribute valuable perspectives on the
needs of graduates. Learning goals should be set and revised at a level that
encourages continuous improvement in
educational programs.
Schools use a variety of structures and approaches to provide learning
experiences for students.
Programs exist at a variety of academic levels and for a variety of
purposes. The following
general definitions describe learning expectations at three
traditional degree levels.
Undergraduate degree programs
(bachelor’s level) in business educate students in a broad
range of knowledge and skills as a basis for careers in business. Learning
expectations build
on the students' pre-collegiate educations to prepare
students to enter and sustain careers in the business world and to
contribute positively in the larger society. Students achieve knowledge
and skills for successful performance in a complex environment requiring
intellectual ability to organize
work, make and communicate sound decisions, and react successfully to
unanticipated events. Students develop learning abilities suitable to
continue higher-level intellectual development.
Master’s level degree programs
educate students at a professional level that includes both the
accumulation of
knowledge and abilities for participation in the business world and an
understanding of how to evaluate knowledge claims in their area of focus.
Specialized master’s programs (e.g., Master of Accounting, Master of
Marketing, Master of
Finance) prepare students for roles in particular areas of business,
management, and other
organization-related professions.
Doctoral level programs
educate students for highly specialized careers in academe or practice.
Graduates of doctoral programs have sufficient understanding to participate
in knowledge
creation in their fields of study.
The aspirations of individual schools may create circumstances unforeseen in
these more
general statements. It is the responsibility of the Peer Review Team and the
Initial
Accreditation Committee or Maintenance of Accreditation Committee to judge
the
reasonableness of any deviations from interpretations of the standards.
Intent
of Assurance of Learning Standards
Assurance of Learning Standards evaluate how well the school accomplishes
the educational
aims at the core of its activities. The learning process is separate from
the demonstration that
students achieve learning goals. Do students achieve learning appropriate to
the programs in
which they participate? Do they have the knowledge and skills appropriate to
their earned
degrees? Because of differences in mission, student population, employer
population, and
other circumstances, the program learning goals will differ from school to
school. Every
school should enunciate and measure its educational goals. Few
characteristics of the school
will be as important to stakeholders as knowing the accomplishment levels of
the school's
students when compared against the school's learning goals.
Assurance of learning to demonstrate accountability (such as in
accreditation) is an important
reason to assess learning
accomplishments. Measures of learning can assure external
constituents such as potential students,
trustees, public officials, supporters, and accreditors, that the
organization meets its goals.
Another important function for measures of learning is to assist the school
and faculty
members to improve programs and courses. By measuring learning the school
can evaluate its
students’ success at achieving learning goals, can use the measures to plan
improvement
efforts, and (depending on the type of measures) can provide feedback and
guidance for
individual students.
STANDARDS ADDRESSING
DEFINING LEARNING GOALS
AND MEASURING ACHIEVEMENT OF LEARNING GOALS6
(STANDARDS 16, 18, 19, and 21)
As
an initial and critical step in its demonstration of learning, the school
must develop a list of
the
learning goals for which it will demonstrate assurance of learning. This
list of learning
goals derives from, or is consonant with, the school's
mission. The mission and objectives set out the intentions of the school, and the learning goals say how the
degree programs demonstrate the mission. That is, the learning goals
describe the desired educational accomplishments of the degree programs. The
learning goals translate the more general statement of the mission
into the educational accomplishments of graduates.
Standards that Relate to Learning Goals
Four of the standards in the Assurance of Learning portion of the standards
relate directly to
the setting and achievement of learning goals. Those are
standards 16, 18, 19, and 21.
Resources that will be
useful for persons setting learning goals and assessing student achievement
are:
a. Banta,
T.W., Lund, J.P., Black, K.E. & Oblinger, F.W. (Eds.). Assessment in
Practice: Putting Principles to Work on College Campuses. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1996.
b. Mentkowski, M. & Associates. Learning that Lasts:
Integrating Learning, Development, and
Performance in College and Beyond.
San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2000.
c. Palomba,
C.A. & Banta, T.W. Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and
Improving
Assessment in Higher Education.
San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1999.
d. Palomba, C.A.
& Banta, T.W. Assessing Student Competence in
Accredited Disciplines: Pioneering
Approaches to Assessment in
Higher Education.
Sterling, Va.: Stylus Publishing, 2001.
e.
Schneider, C.G. & Shoenberg, R. Contemporary Understandings of Liberal
Education. Washington,
D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities,
1998.
Reviewers will expect schools to explicitly identify the goals and the
demonstrations of achievement for each of these standards. For standard 21
the bulleted statements in the
standard represent the normal learning goals for doctoral programs. Schools
need only specify
doctoral learning goals for programs where they differ from
those listed in the standard.
Intent of Learning Goals
Learning goals serve two purposes. First, learning goals convey to
participants, faculty and
students, the educational outcomes toward which they are working. This helps
in setting priorities and emphasis, designing learning experiences, and
fulfilling educational
expectations. While the learning goals cannot be exhaustively stated for any
higher education program, it is possible to set educational targets and to
assure that the learning is progressing in
the specified direction. Second, educational goals assist potential students
to choose programs
that fit their personal career goals. Only with an accurate
understanding of the learning goals
will a potential student
be able to make an informed choice about whether to join the program.
What
is a Program?
The
school must specify learning goals for each separate degree
program. Generally, such goals are anticipated for each degree program, not
for separate
majors or concentrations within a degree. Curricula content will determine
if one set of
learning goals or different sets of learning goals will be required for
separate degree programs.
For
example, regardless of the degree title, if an undergraduate business
program has a
common framework for general knowledge and skills areas and
management-specific
knowledge and skills areas as the foundation for a major, concentration, or
emphasis area, one set of leaning goals may be defined for all degree
programs with this format and goals for each
major, concentration, or
emphasis area (while they may, or may not, be developed for the
school’s use) would not be required for
accreditation review purposes. If there are major differences in the
curricula content in terms of general knowledge and skills areas that
support a major, concentration, or
emphasis area, specification of differentiated learning goals for each
degree program would be expected
though some learning goals could be the same across the different
degree programs.
A
school may offer substantially the same MBA degree to full-time day students
and to part-time
students in evening classes. The school might decide that the goals of the
program are the same in both delivery modes, and thus, one set of goals
would be provided. Alternatively, the
school could determine that the two programs should have distinct learning
goals. An
Executive MBA program would require a separate set of goals to denote its
differences from
other programs.
Each specialized masters
program would require a unique set of learning goals though a subset
may be common to multiple programs.
Doctoral programs should have appropriate learning goals reflecting
the content of the program and emphasis or concentration area.
Differences among Schools
Because
of differences in mission, faculty expectations, student body composition,
and other
factors, schools vary greatly in how they express their learning goals.
Definition of the
learning goals is a key element in how the school defines
itself. Thus, care should be exercised in establishing goals and in the
regular review and revision of the learning goals and measurement of their
accomplishment.
Even if schools choose similar domains of learning goals, they are likely to
develop the goals
in
different ways. There is no intention in the AACSB accreditation process
that schools
should have the same definitions of learning goals, or that they should
assess accomplishment
of
learning goals in the same way. To the contrary, the standards expect
faculty members of
each school to determine the proper definitions and
measurements for their situation.
Goals
at the Program Level
Learning goals can be
established at different levels in the educational process. At the course
or single-topic level, faculty members
normally have very detailed learning goals. These standards do not
focus on such detailed learning goals.
AACSB accreditation is
directed at program-level learning goals of a more general nature.
These goals will state the broad educational expectations for each degree
program. These goals specify the
intellectual and behavioral competencies a program is intended to instill.
In defining these goals, the
faculty members clarify how they intend for graduates to be different
as a result of their completion of the program. By developing operational
definitions of the goals and assessing student performance, the
school measures its level of success at
accomplishing the goals. Normally, four to ten learning goals will be
specified for each degree program.
General
and Management-Specific Goals
The
core learning goals for business programs will likely include two separate
kinds of
learning. First, there will be goals for the general knowledge and
skills acquired by students. The general knowledge and skills goals, while
not management specific, relate to knowledge
and abilities that
graduates will carry with them into their careers. Such learning areas as
communications abilities, problem-solving
abilities, ethical reasoning skills, and language abilities are the types of
general knowledge and abilities that schools might define as a part of
these goals.
Second, there will be management-specific learning goals for
students. These goals relate to
expectations for learning accomplishment in areas that directly relate to
management tasks and
form
the business portion of degree requirements. Such areas include traditional
learning
disciplines such as accounting, management science, marketing, human
resources, and operations management,
and, depending on how the school defines its mission, might include
such management-specific but non-traditional areas as corporate
anthropology, change management, or
others. In developing learning goals, the school should give careful
attention to both the general and the management-specific learning
goals.
Faculty
Responsibility for Learning Goals
The faculty in aggregate (either in total, in representative units, in
disciplinary units, or through
some other organizational structure) will normally be the persons
responsible for listing and defining the school's learning goals. Different
schools have developed different structures and
procedures for creating learning goals; deep involvement of faculty members
in the process is a
critical feature of whatever mechanisms the school uses. Agreement on
learning goals for
academic programs is one of the central defining features of higher
education, and thus, faculty
involvement/ownership is a
necessary ingredient.
After setting the
learning goals, the faculty must decide where the goals will be addressed
within degree curricula. What coursework
or learning experiences provided by the academic pursuit of degrees
will help students to achieve the goals? Goals may be course specific, or
they may be spread throughout the
curriculum, or both. For example, a learning goal stated as "ability
to express complex business matters in writing" may be a part of a business
communications course, and it also may be
addressed in required writing projects in additional courses.
Once faculty members have decided which components of the curriculum will
contain certain learning goals, they must establish monitoring mechanisms to
ensure that the proper learning
experiences occur. Course syllabi, examinations, and projects should be
regularly reviewed to see that learning experiences are included to prepare
students to accomplish the intended
learning goals. While this monitoring activity does not require elaborate
processes, it must be
regular, systematic, and sustained.
Beyond choosing and developing the list of learning goals, faculty members
must
operationalize the learning goals by specifying or developing the
measurements that assess
learning achievement on the learning goals. Obviously, operationalization of
the learning
goals is the ultimate step in the definition process. No matter how
carefully the goals have
been
determined, making them operational through actual measurements is
the definition.
While the school may engage the assistance of strategic consultants in the
creation of the list of goals or measurement consultants in the
operationalization of goals, faculty members cannot
abnegate their own
responsibility for final definitions of goals and measurements.
Standards 18 and 19 include language intended to set the intellectual
capacities of master’s
level learning. This language suggests how graduates will be able to use
their knowledge and skills. It is not intended to specify learning goals for
master’s degree programs. The specific
language at issue is:
In Standard 18:
“The capacities developed through the knowledge and skills of a general
master’s level
program are:
-
Capacity to lead in
organizational situations.
-
Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar
circumstances through a
conceptual
understanding of relevant disciplines.
-
Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope
with unforeseen events, and
to manage in
unpredictable environments.”
In Standard 19:
“The level of knowledge
represented by the students of a specialized master’s level program is the:
-
Application of
knowledge even in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual
understanding of the specialization.
-
Ability to adapt and
innovate to solve problems.
-
Capacity to critically
analyze and question knowledge claims in the specialized discipline.”
While schools may wish to include some of these concepts in their learning
goals for specific
programs, there is no requirement to do so. The learning
goals developed by each institution should fit the mission of that
institution and the particular degree program.
Using External Guidance
The
faculty has the responsibility for setting the learning goals for degrees.
However, they
need not, indeed they should not, operate in an isolated fashion on a task
so critical to success
of
the school in meeting its mission. External constituencies can inject
expertise and
perspectives into the process that will be unavailable if the
faculty operates alone.
For business degrees, the business community provides valuable information
about critical
skills and knowledge for graduates. Major employers of graduates and
corporate advisory groups give information about the situations most often
faced by graduates and view the learning goals of the school from the
perspective of persons who must put knowledge into
practice on a daily basis.
They also may provide insight into trends and anticipated demands on
graduates, thus assisting in curricular revision toward future needs.
University expertise outside of the business school can also be a valuable
resource. Faculty in
language and area studies, communications, social sciences,
law, information technology, and other
disciplines can share information about the latest research of their
disciplines, how it is best taught, and how business graduates may
utilize it.
Students and recent graduates of degree programs can provide their insights
into strengths and
weaknesses of the educational experience provided by the business degree
programs. Faculty
may incorporate those ideas into the work of shaping the set
of learning goals.
The
definition of learning goals must be developed at each member institution to
fit the
characteristics, circumstances, and mission of the institution and its
business degree programs.
The
definition of learning goals is the first step toward the development of a
program of
assurance of learning. This first step answers the question, "Assurance of
learning of what?"
Once this first step has been completed, the faculty can begin its work on
the final question of
an
assurance of learning program, "How do we demonstrate that we are
accomplishing our
learning goals?" The following discussion provides
suggestions for demonstrating learning accomplishment.
Demonstrating Learning
Achievement
The
school must demonstrate what learning occurs for each of the learning goals
the school
identifies as appropriate for its programs. This discussion focuses on
approaches schools can
use to assure that students achieve learning expectations. By
no means does this imply that these
approaches exhaust the ways schools can demonstrate that learning goals are
met. This presentation of different approaches is meant to declare that no
single approach to assurance of learning is required. Schools are encouraged
to choose, create, and innovate learning measures
that fit with the goals of the degree
programs, pedagogies in use, and the schools' circumstances.
Approaches to Assurance of Learning:
1. Selection:
Schools may select students into a program on the basis of knowledge or
skills expected in graduates of a degree program.
Some
examples of assurance by selection might include:
·
A school might insist that all of its MBA graduates have
second-language ability.
Rather than providing second-language training, the school might admit only
students who can demonstrate second-language ability on a specified exam.
Though the school
does not provide this learning, they use the exam to assure (at entrance to
the program)
that all of the graduates have the specified ability.
·
A program may select students on the basis of their having
achieved certain levels of
written communications skills as demonstrated in materials submitted during
the
school's application process. An assessment of the required
skills would be a routine part of the admission decision process. The school
might provide skill-building
opportunities for applicants who do not register sufficiently high in the
selection
process, and such students would have a later opportunity to show that they
meet the school's expectations.
·
A school may
attract a large proportion of students to its master’s level program who
have engineering degrees or other
backgrounds with high levels of quantitative training.
While the degree program may have
curricular opportunities for students to develop
statistical reasoning skills, many
applicants may demonstrate such skills in a placement
exam during the application process. For
this school, assurance of learning on its
statistical reasoning learning goal may
be demonstrable through performance on the placement exam at admission or
alternatively, through another assurance technique for those students
who take the required statistics courses.
·
Schools in countries where thirteen years of pre-collegiate
education is the norm may
be
able to select students who already meet general knowledge and skills
learning goals
relating to historical and cultural understanding.
In
the accreditation review process, schools will be expected to demonstrate
that the
selection process ensures that students have accomplished the learning goals
when they use
selection as the assurance method.
2. Course-embedded
measurement: Required courses may expose students to systematic
learning experiences designed to produce
graduates with the particular knowledge or
abilities specified in the school's learning goals. In such cases, the
school can establish assessments
within the required courses for those learning goals. Some examples of
course-embedded measurement might be:
·
A school that has a written communication learning goal might
specify that a particular
course will have required writing exercises in it. Such exercises could
serve the
assessment needs of the course and also provide the school with assurance
that students meet the learning goal in
written communication. The course-embedded measurements
must be constructed to demonstrate whether
students achieve the school’s learning goals, and the measurements
must be a mandated part of that course.
·
A school with learning goals that require students to
integrate knowledge across
business functional areas or to incorporate ethical considerations into
decision-making,
may embed the measurement of accomplishment on those goals
into a capstone business-strategy course.
In addition to the information provided for course assessment
by the projects that measure learning on
these topics, the assessments provide the
school with the assurance measures
needed to ascertain whether the school's learning goals are being
met.
In
the accreditation review process, reviewers will expect schools to have
examples of
student work available for inspection at the on-site review when they use
course-embedded
measurement to assure that students accomplish learning goals. Schools
should present
examples of student performance on tests or in course project work. The
school should
show how information from these measurements informs the school’s management
of the
educational process. Schools should describe the processes they use to see
that the
information from the course-embedded measurements inform the schools'
management
processes and lead to improvement efforts.
3.
Demonstration through stand-alone testing or performance: Students
may be required
to
demonstrate certain knowledge or skills as a requirement for graduation or
at some other
specific point in their degree programs.
Examples of demonstration through performance often take the form of special
assessments:
·
At the end of a degree program students may be asked to
demonstrate knowledge and
ability through testing in specific content areas such as foreign language
ability, critical
thinking ability, or specific content knowledge. Specific content knowledge
tests may
represent learning goals for disciplines.
·
A special examination required of all students to qualify for
the final year of the
program might require a demonstration of composition skills
in written communications.
·
A thesis or senior project might be required to demonstrate
students' ability to integrate
knowledge across different
disciplines.
EXAMPLES
OF LEARNING GOALS AND MEASURES OF ACHIEVEMENT
Example 1
School A has defined a learning goal in ethical reasoning for
each of its four undergraduate
majors. Student achievement on this goal is relevant to demonstrating
satisfaction of Standard
16. The school’s faculty has defined the goal:
Learning Goal
“Each student can recognize and analyze ethical problems and
choose and defend resolutions
for
practical situations that occur in accounting, human resource management, and
marketing.”
Demonstration of Achievement
The
school uses course-embedded exercises in three required introductory-level
courses. Faculty in the three disciplines
have developed different methods for instructing and assessing
achievement toward this learning goal.
In
accounting, a two-week module near the end of the introductory course is devoted
to
“Ethical standards and fraud in accounting.” A topic outline has
been developed by faculty
members
to structure an exam on the materials of this module, and a standard set of
expectations has been created for grading the exam. In addition
to this exam’s contribution to
the course grade, it provides a pass/fail indication on the
learning goal.
In
human resource management, students must provide four written analyses of
problem situations during the course. On three of these analyses (on the topics
of selection, reward
systems, and job design), students are asked to respond to ethical issues. A
standard scoring
key on
the ethical component provides evaluation toward the course grade and a
pass/fail
indication on the learning goal.
In marketing, each student
must compose a term paper analyzing a current national or international
marketing campaign. The analysis must include a specified set of components,
and ethical issues that have been presented
in lectures are among the required components. In addition to the overall
grade of the paper, each student receives a pass/fail indicator on the ethics
component.
In
addition to reporting course grades, each instructor of these three courses
provides a
checklist of all of those students who successfully completed the ethics
expectation. This
information is a part of each student’s record and all three parts of the
learning goal must be
achieved before graduation. Students who fail the ethics evaluation while
passing the course
repeat the evaluation exercise or ethics module until they are
successful.
Example 2
School
B has a communications learning goal that is a part of its expectations for all
undergraduate
degrees. Student achievement on this goal is relevant to demonstrating
satisfaction of Standard 16. The school’s faculty has defined the goal:
Learning
Goal
“Each
student can conceptualize a complex issue into a coherent written statement and
oral
presentation.”
Demonstration of Achievement
The school uses course-embedded exercises to demonstrate
achievement of this learning goal. The Strategic Management course required of
each student in the final year of the program
includes among its course
evaluations a written analysis of a multi-functional case study and an
oral presentation on an industry-wide
analysis. A faculty task force has developed a
standardized scoring key for use with these two exercises. Using
dimensions agreed to by the faculty, each student’s performance on these
exercises is evaluated. Students must repeat the exercises until they
have satisfactorily accomplished minimum levels of performance.
Example 3
School
C has a language requirement for the M.S. in International Business degree.
Student
achievement on this goal is relevant to demonstrating satisfaction of Standard
19 for students
in the MSIB program. The school’s faculty has defined the goal:
Learning Goal
“Each
student shall be able to converse and to write at an acceptable level for
business
communications in three languages one of which shall be English.”
Demonstration of Achievement
Specific stand-alone
examinations are used to measure performance on this learning goal.
Each student must pass the conversation-level exam in two languages other
than his or her native language. If
English is not the native language, it must be one of the examined
languages. The language department of the
institution administers a program of standardized
exams consisting of both oral and written
components. Students may take the exams at any time during their enrollment in
the MSIB program. No student is eligible for graduation until the
language requirement is met.
Example 4
School D has defined a learning goal for all students in general
management master’s programs
(MBA,
EMBA, Master’s of Project Management) related to the understanding of
organizational financial resources. Student achievement on this goal is relevant
to demonstrating
satisfaction of Standard 18. The school’s faculty has defined the goal:
Learning Goal
“Each
student shall be able to evaluate the financial position of organizations
through
examination of balance sheets, cash flow statements, and budgets.”
Demonstration of Achievement
The
school uses a course-embedded examination to assess performance on this learning
goal. The final
examination in the required Financial Accounting course includes a section
specifically aimed at assessment of this
goal at a level that has been determined by the accounting faculty. A
student’s performance on this section must satisfy the minimal level, or it must
be retaken until it is passed. Students for whom the Financial Accounting course
is waived by virtue of undergraduate
accounting coursework, must satisfactorily pass an equivalent
examination.
Example 5
School E has defined a learning goal pertaining to all master’s
level degree programs. The
goal
relates to teamwork skills and, it is relevant to demonstrating satisfaction of
Standards 18 and
19. The school’s faculty has defined the goal:
Learning Goal
“Each
student must understand and be able to use team building and collaborative
behaviors in the accomplishment of group tasks.”
Demonstration of Achievement
A
course-embedded exercise is used to assess performance on this learning goal.
The required Organizational Behavior course has an extensive assessment-center module
which trains all students as assessment center evaluators on
team-behavior dimensions, and all students are
rated for team skills in a series of group experiences. Performance as
both rater and team member is combined into an evaluation on the learning
goal.
Indirect
Measures of Learning
As part of a comprehensive learning assessment program, schools
may supplement direct measures of achievement with indirect measures. Such
techniques as surveying alumni about their preparedness to enter the job market
or surveying employers about the strengths and
weaknesses of graduates can
provide some information about perceptions of student
achievement. Such indirect measures, however,
cannot replace direct assessment of student
performance. Often, schools find that alumni and employer surveys serve
better as tools to gather knowledge
about what is needed in the current workplace than as measures of student
achievement. Such surveys can alert the
school to trends, validate other sources of curriculum guidance, and maintain
external relationships. By themselves, surveys are weak evidence for
learning.
Use of Achievement Measures
Measures of learning have little value in and of themselves. They
should make a difference in
the
operations of the school. Schools should show how results impact the life of the
school.
Such demonstration can include uses to inform and motivate
individual students and uses to
generate changes in curricula,
pedagogy, and teaching and learning materials.
Implementation of Assurance of Learning Processes
The development of systematic
meaningful assurance of learning processes with fully
developed learning goals and outcomes assessment processes is normally a
multi-year project. These standards were originally adopted in April
2003. For 2007 and beyond, schools should be
demonstrating a high degree of maturity in terms of delineation of clear
learning goals, implementation of
outcome assessment processes, and demonstrated use of assessment information to
improve curricula. This expectation applies to schools entering the initial
accreditation process as well as those that are in the maintenance of
accreditation stage. For schools with
visit years in 2007-08 and beyond, the impact of assessment outcomes on
continuing development of degree programs should be evident.
|