FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD ASSESSMENT by REBECCA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD ASSESSMENT By REBECCA MARILYN DUEBEN A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Educational Leadership, Sport Studies and Educational/Counseling Psychology DECEMBER 2015 © Copyright by REBECCA MARILYN DUEBEN, 2015 All Rights Reserved © Copyright by REBECCA MARILYN DUEBEN, 2015 All Rights Reserved To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of REBECCA MARILYN DUEBEN find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. _________________________________________ Kelly A. Ward, Ph.D., Chair _________________________________________ Kristin Huggins, Ph.D. _________________________________________ Patricia A. Sturko, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am truly grateful for my committee for their support and vital contributions and feedback to this dissertation. Specifically, I acknowledge my chair, Kelly Ward, for her time and commitment in supporting me in this work. To my husband, Douglas Habib, I am so grateful for your constant love and support. Thank you for all of the work you’ve done and for holding down the fort. To my daughter, Ursula, I thank you for your great attitude and sweet willingness to pitch in and help pick up extra chores. To my daughter Sophia, I am grateful for your ability to make me laugh and for the massages you gave me. Together, you three have created a loving home. Thank you for so graciously supporting me through many long days and nights. iii FACULTY ATTITUDES TOWARD ASSESSMENT Abstract by Rebecca Marilyn Dueben, Ph.D. Washington State University December 2015 Chair: Kelly Ward Within the field of undergraduate program assessment, anecdotal evidence abounds about negative faculty attitudes. Regardless of the common wisdom, there is little research that corroborates these reports. If reports are correct that faculty resistance is wide spread, it is still not clear if that resistance is toward accreditation, professional development, institutional requirements, other calls for accountability, or assessment. In fact, faculty members can be seen as spending much of their careers assessing: Faculty members routinely assess their students, a textbook they are using, whether the curriculum has adequately prepared students for the next class or their careers, and more. Faculty attitudes toward program assessment remain unclear and largely uninvestigated. The focus of this study is based on 18 interviews of faculty members in three programs of study at a large, research-intensive, land-grant institution. The approach is socially constructivist in nature; the theoretical lens is that faculty members have constructed concepts of assessment and that their constructions inform their participation. The study provides information about faculty attitudes toward assessment with a nuanced understanding toward the factors that influence their attitudes. The study reveals that faculty members view student learning outcome assessment as a call for accountability, a reaction that supports their fear that the information they provide will be used to cut positions and programs of study. When assessment is initiated iv within the program, however, faculty willingly participate to gain the information that assessment provides to improve their curriculum and their teaching. Additionally, how faculty construct their understanding of assessment is related to the epistemological foundations of their disciplines. The study adds to the body of literature on faculty attitudes toward assessment. Next steps include incorporating faculty perspective and participation into the assessment process. Additional research will reveal the support needed for faculty to engage in assessment and for institutions to support that engagement. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOLWEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ ix CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1 Faculty Involvement in Assessment ...........................................................................3 Purpose of Study and Research Questions .................................................................4 Research Design and Methodology ...........................................................................6 Theoretical Framework ..............................................................................................7 Summary .....................................................................................................................8 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE .............................................................................................9 Current Context of Regional Accreditation and Accountability ................................9 A Brief History of Assessment, Accreditation and Calls for Accountability ..........13 Purpose of Assessment ............................................................................................18 Role of Faculty .........................................................................................................19 Disciplinary Foundations .........................................................................................22 An Opportunity to Shape Assessment and Accreditation ........................................25 3. METHOD AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................28 Research Design .......................................................................................................28 Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................31 Positionality .............................................................................................................34 Methods ....................................................................................................................36 vi Setting ...................................................................................................................36 The Programs .......................................................................................................37 Physical Sciences ...........................................................................................37 Social Sciences ...............................................................................................39 Humanities ......................................................................................................41 Participants ............................................................................................................43 Interviews .............................................................................................................44 Documents ............................................................................................................45 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................45 Trustworthiness ....................................................................................................48 Consent .................................................................................................................49 Limitations ............................................................................................................50 Summary ......................................................................................................................51 4. FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................52 Faculty Embrace Assessment ......................................................................................55 Faculty Frustration with Assessment ...........................................................................62 Faculty Fear Assessment ..............................................................................................74 Faculty See Assessment as a Threat ............................................................................77 Discipline Matters ........................................................................................................81 The Physical Science Program .............................................................................83 The Social Science Program .................................................................................86 The Humanities Program ......................................................................................90 Summary ......................................................................................................................94 vii 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE ....................................................................................................................97 Major Findings .........................................................................................................98 Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................104 Recommendations for Future Practice ...................................................................107