Course Assessment
In alignment with UNI’s Excellence in Assessment designation, recognizing colleges and universities conducting comprehensive assessment of student learning outcomes as a means to drive internal improvement and advance student success, the Office of Community Engagement assesses a sample of SL courses annually. The results of the assessment are shared with faculty teaching SL courses, as well as posted here.
Reviewers based their assessment on UNI’s definition of Service-Learning which can be found here. A rubric was developed based on this definition.
RUBRIC TO ASSESS SERVICE-LEARNING COURSES REFLECTION
PAPERS/ASSIGNMENTS
Adapted by Dr. Barrett Brenton from Rubric Developed by Campus Compact Further Adapted by Dr. Julianne Gassman, University of Northern Iowa
| ||||
Dimensions of Quality (Criteria) | 0 NO EVIDENCE [F] | 1 NOVICE [Grade Range D] | 2 APPRENTICE / PROFICIENT [Grade Range C / B] | 3 DISTINGUISHED/ADVANCED [Grade Range A] |
APPLYING THE SERVICE EXPERIENCE TO THE ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE BASE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COURSE | Student does not apply the academic knowledge base and objectives of the course to the service experience.
| Student applies minimal academic knowledge and objectives of the course to the service experience.
| Student expresses some connection between the academic knowledge base and objectives of the course and the service experience. | Student creates their own academic perspective infused with the knowledge base and objectives of the course and applies it to the service experience beyond the curriculum. |
MEETING PARTNER’S NEEDS / RESPONSIBILITY TO COMMUNITY
| Student does not demonstrates any awareness of purpose of service in course and/or personal responsibility to community. | Student demonstrates a limited awareness of purpose of service in course and/or personal responsibility to community. | Student expresses insight into community issues pertinent to the service project course content but does not show evidence of how to apply that knowledge. | Student acknowledges a responsibility to community regarding issues pertinent to the service and the course content. Expresses a commitment to working towards specific solutions. |
IMPACT ON STUDENT’S PERSONAL LIFE / PURPOSEFUL REFLECTION | Student expresses no connection between service, course content, and self. | Student expresses very limited connection between service, course content, and self. | Student expresses a connection between service, course content and self. | Student expresses change(s) in self because of the service and knowledge. |
UNDERSTANDING OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND STUDENT’S ROLE AS ACTIVE CITIZEN IN SOCIETY | Student expresses no connection between individual action and societal well-being. | Student expresses limited connection between individual action and societal well-being. | Student expresses a connection between individual action and societal well-being. | Student expresses change in self and role as citizen knowing the connection between individual action and societal well-being. |
Highlights
The 2023-2024 assessment of SL Courses highlights are as follows:
- 56 SL courses in 2023-2024;
- 1,416 student enrolled in SL Courses (numbers may be duplicated);
- 9 courses randomly selected for assessment; 5 artifacts submitted for each course; this represented courses from each college and UNIFI courses.
- One course had nearly all 3s;
- One course had nearly all 0s;
- All criteria was assessed at an average between 2 - 2.5 (letter grade of C)
- The criteria with the highest assessment is “impact on students personal life/purposeful reflection” with an average score of 2.25.
- The criteria with the lowest assessment is “understanding of social responsibility and student’s role as activity citizen in society” with an average score of 2.08.
- While most courses are implementing best practices for SL courses, some courses do not have evidence of student learning outcomes in alignment with SL criteria;
- The criteria - applying the service experience to the academic knowledge base and objectives of the course assessed at a 2.18 indicating there is indeed for better alignment between the service project and the learning outcomes of the course;
- The criteria - meeting partner’s needs / responsibility to community” assessed at 2.21, indicating a need assure the project is in line with the community partner’s needs;
- Given the purpose of SL courses there is a need to better align the course content and reflection with a student’s understanding of social responsibility and student’s role as activity citizen in society.
Recommendations
Based on the above assessment and along with best practices, below are recommendations for SL courses:
- Include the definition of Service-Learning in the syllabus, noting the course is a SL Course;
- Include a learning outcome on a student’s understanding of social responsibility and student’s role as activity citizen in society; maybe include a link to examples
- In the reflection assignment, prompt students with questions that align with the SL course rubric;