Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness in Community Colleges: The Transfer Function.

Autor/inn/en	Seybert, Jeffrey A.; und weitere
Titel	Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness in Community Colleges: The Transfer Function.
Quelle	(1991), (42 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Academic Achievement; Academic Persistence; College Outcomes Assessment; College Transfer Students; Community Colleges; Comparative Analysis; Followup Studies; Graduate Surveys; Higher Education; Research Design; Research Methodology; Self Evaluation (Groups); State Surveys; Student Attitudes; Student Educational Objectives; Tables (Data); Two Year College Students; Two Year Colleges; Universities + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Schulleistung; Hochschulwechsel; Schulwechsel; Studienortwechsel; Community college; Community College; Follow-up studies; Kontaktstudium; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Forschungsdesign; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Self evaluation; Group; Groups; Selbstevaluation; Gruppe (Soz); Schülerverhalten; Tabelle; University; Universität
Abstract	In order to measure the effectiveness of Johnson County Community College's (JCCC's) transfer function and to examine an overall approach to research on institutional effectiveness, this paper applies Jeffrey A. Seybert's (1990) Effectiveness Assertiveness Matrix (EAM) to a transfer follow-up survey conducted at JCCC (Kansas) and to a 1984-85 Kansas statewide transfer study. Introductory material describes the challenges of demonstrating institutional effectiveness for community colleges, explores the particular problems associated with assessing the transfer function, and lays out the conceptual components of the EAM. The Matrix's two dimensions (i.e., internal vs. external audiences and student vs. institutional variables) are examined, yielding the following multiple indicators of community college effectiveness: (1) internally-directed student measures (e.g., satisfaction of individual educational objectives); (2) externally-directed student measures (e.g., performance on professional licensure exams); (3) internally-directed institutional measures (e.g., results of program reviews); and (4) externally-directed institutional measures (e.g., employer evaluations of student preparation). Next, the paper identifies seminal questions regarding transfer and, by applying the EAM, determines that the appropriate data elements and measures to answer these questions can be obtained by using JCCC's transfer student follow-up survey and the Kansas statewide survey which compared transcripts/reports of transfer and native students at senior institutions. Though the bulk of the paper focuses on the use of the EAM in analyzing the two studies, methodology and results of each study are also summarized. The report concludes with recommendations gleaned from study results and with a discussion of the strengths of the EAM approach to assessing institutional effectiveness. (JMC)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC