Assessment Mini Grants

The School of Management Dean's office seeks to award grant money to business faculty who develop assessment tools that are considered direct methods* of assessment. Each award will be in the amount to $200.00. The following types of assessment tools will receive preference during this grant cycle.

• Pre/Post Test
  Develop a preliminary examination to be administered at the beginning of a pre-requisite course and a similar examination upon completion of some major course(s) for comparison purposes.

• Rubric
  A rubric is a scoring guide that includes clear and well-defined criteria to evaluate student performance. Rubrics consist of a fixed measurement scale (e.g., 4 point) and a list of criteria, or traits, describing the characteristics of performance for each score point. Rubrics are frequently accompanied by examples (anchors or exemplars) of products or performances to illustrate the various score points on the scale. Holistic rubrics give one overall score to the performance or piece of work; analytic rubrics provide a score for each one of the identified traits. Rubrics may be used to assess writing, oral communication, critical thinking, decision-making, and a number of other performances/tasks.

• Case Study Scenario with Scoring Rubric
  Include a complete description of a business scenario; identify specific issues to be examined; and suggest an outline for a written and/or oral report. The accompanying rubric should include the elements described in the rubric definition provided in the previous award category

• Research Project with Scoring Rubric
  Include a complete description of the project including the nature of the project, specific requirements, and suggest an outline for a written and/or oral report. The accompanying rubric should include the elements described in the rubric definition provided earlier.

• Other Direct Measures

Proposal Requirements

All mini-grant proposals must include the following information:

1. Type of assessment tool and name of the faculty member
2. The specific learning goal(s) that will be assessed by the tool. Preference given to tools that assess program level learning goals (Undergraduate or MBA)
3. Suggested environments (classes or activities) where the tool may be employed
4. Special instructions, if any, for the effective use of the tool.
5. A copy of the test, rubric, or scenario/scoring rubric. (In the case of a test an answer sheet must also be provided)

A mini-grant Application Form is available upon request from Paul Perhach, Assistant Dean, Room 206 Brennan Hall, extension 6100.

Dates:

Proposals will be accepted and reviewed on an on-going basis. Contact Paul Perhach, Assistant Dean, for more information.

* Note the distinction between direct and indirect methods of assessment.

Direct methods of assessing student learning are those that provide evidence of whether or not a student has command of a specific subject or content area, can perform a certain task, exhibit a particular skill, or demonstrate a certain quality in his or her work (e.g. creativity, analysis, synthesis, objectivity, etc.)

Indirect methods of assessing student learning are those that assess qualities related to the act of learning, such as factors that predict or mediate learning or perceptions about learning, but not learning itself. Indirect evidence is often gained through the use of self-report format surveys, questionnaires, and interviews