Gen Ed Assessment and You!

Dr. Jay Schwartz

Dr. Melanie Landon-Hays

​

Presented to WOU Faculty Senate

February 26, 2026

What is GEARS?

General Education Assessment Research Subcommittee

The purpose of the General Education Assessment Research Subcommittee (GEARS, representing a change from the former name, GEPLC) is to:

• engage in purposeful assessment of students’ progress toward General Education (GE) learning outcomes,
• support the goals of Academic Effectiveness at Western Oregon University for the benefit of WOU students and faculty

Evolving GE Assessment

Purpose & Impact

• GOAL: Meaningful continuous improvement is an iterative and faculty driven process. We need a process that allows us to look at courses to see where students are thriving and where the curriculum needs adjustment to better support students’ learning journeys from entry to exit, while closing equity gaps.
• Why are we making changes?
• Streamlining complexity
• Adopting a model that provides both formative and summative feedback
• Benefits to individual faculty?
• Reduced assessment fatigue
• Natural alignment with work being done in class
• Better teaching context

What does the literature say about assessment?

• ALIGN: Outcome Mapping
• Ensure that learning outcomes, curriculum, and assessments are intentionally mapped to one another without being redundant or overwhelming
• ASSESS: Targeted Data Collection.
• Collect meaningful, authentic data on student learning output with minimal faculty work
• EVOLVE: Continuous improvement.
• Close the loop by using assessment data to inform curricular and pedagogical changes, rather than just filing reports for accreditation
• EXCEL: Optimizing Teaching and Learning.
• Reach a state where the assessment framework actively enhances student mastery and empowers faculty

Change #1: Operationalizing Outcomes

What’s changing in the framework?

Operational Outcomes

​

• 1.1 Written Communication
• 1.2 Quantitative Literacy
• 1.3 Analysis
• 1.4 Application of Conventions
• 1.5 Information Literacy
• 1.6 Exploration of Disciplines

​

• 2.1 Reason-Based Inquiry
• 2.2 Evaluation of Evidence

​

• 3.1 Self-Awareness and Cultural Competency
• 3.2 Personal and Social Responsibility

​

• 4.1 Connections across Experiences and Discipline
• 4.2 Transfer through Reflection and Application

Existing GELOs

​

​

GELO 1: Intellectual Foundations & Breadth of Exposure

​

​

GELO 2. Critical Thinking

​

​

GELO 3. Responsibility to Community

​

GELO 4. Multidisciplinary Learning

Descriptions of each not listed here

Change #1: Operationalizing Outcomes

GELO 1

Outcome 1.2

Outcome 1.1

Milestone 1.1.1

Milestone 1.1.2

Milestone 1.2.1

High-level programmatic outcomes that describe the vision for what a student gains from their general education experience

Specific intellectual skills and perspectives that students should achieve by the time they complete the GE program

Specific activities students should engage in or achieve in order to cumulatively fulfill a given Outcome

What’s changing in the framework?

2-3 Milestones per Outcome

Each Milestone is achieved and assessed in a specific course category

Change #1: Operationalizing Outcomes

What’s changing in the framework?

Operational Outcomes

​

• 1.1 Written Communication
• 1.2 Quantitative Literacy
• 1.3 Analysis
• 1.4 Application of Conventions
• 1.5 Information Literacy
• 1.6 Exploration of Disciplines

​

• 2.1 Reason-Based Inquiry
• 2.2 Evaluation of Evidence

​

• 3.1 Self-Awareness and Cultural Competency
• 3.2 Personal and Social Responsibility

​

• 4.1 Connections across Experiences and Discipline
• 4.2 Transfer through Reflection and Application

Existing GELOs

​

​

GELO 1: Intellectual Foundations & Breadth of Exposure

​

​

GELO 2. Critical Thinking

​

​

GELO 3. Responsibility to Community

​

GELO 4. Multidisciplinary Learning

2-3 Milestones per operational outcome (not listed here)

Change #1: Alignment Methodology

How did you draft Milestones and course alignments?

• Operational outcomes by GEARS based on existing RUBRIC FEATURES
• Milestones by GEARS based on existing RUBRIC LEVELS
• Course alignments by GEARS based on existing GELO alignments
• Feedback on alignments via faculty surveys Spring 2025
• Revisions
• Approved by GEC Fall 2025

Change #2: Assessment Model

Mechanisms that allow us to do both formative and summative assessment

Old Model:

• Instructors select “signature assignments”
• Students are randomly sampled
• Instructors submit student work to GEARS
• Work assessed with 1-size-fits-all rubrics
• Assessment not done by experts in the discipline

New Model:

• Clear alignment between course categories and SPECIFIC GE Milestones
• Assessment is a “yes/no” decision
• Instructors (experts) make that decision
• Instructors submit those yes/no scores to GEARS
• GEARS hosts events for sharing resources, ideas, and student success

Instructor Role in Assessment

What can I (a GE instructor) expect?

What:

• Know which Milestones are aligned with your course (info provided by GEC/GEARS)
• Choose or develop opportunities for students to achieve those Milestones
• Assess whether each student did so (yes/no)
• Fill out a form provided by GEARS
• Optional: attend workshops with other instructors

​

When:

• Exact timeline/cycle still being determined
• Expect ~ 1-2 times every 4-5 years

Example Alignments

What can I (a GE instructor) expect?

I am an instructor for PSY 201Z Introduction to Psychology I

Which category is it in? Exploring Knowledge: Social, Historic, and Civic Perspectives

Which Milestones are aligned to that category?

-Analysis Outcome, Proficiency Milestone: Student applies a course-appropriate lens in order to better understand how parts work in relation to one another and to a greater whole

-Info Literacy Outcome, Proficiency Milestone: Student contributes to scholarly conversation at an appropriate level (e.g. class essay, classroom discussion) and gives credit to the original ideas of others through proper attribution and citation

-Evaluation of Evidence Outcome, Proficiency Milestone: Student evaluates the validity, reliability, and/or relevance of a source of evidence, recognizing the features that lend sources validity or reliability. (E.g. evaluate an argument that is based on said evidence)

What will GEARS do with the data?

What can I (a GE instructor) expect?

We use the assessment data to check the health of the GE program as a whole

If Outcomes are being achieved on a wide scale, then great!

If Outcomes are not being achieved on a wide scale, this is addressed with program-level changes, e.g., development of resources for faculty and students

We do NOT evaluate individual courses/instructors or hold instructors accountable for student achievement - though we WILL work with instructors to help understand Milestones and meaningfully incorporate them into courses

​

How will this Inform GE Program Outcomes?

Closing the Loop

• Implement a review of current courses to revisit identified outcomes
• Conduct a recertification of courses that have been in the Gen Ed curriculum for more than 3 years
• Create course review mechanisms that help us educate faculty about the learning outcomes for new course proposals
• Provide more targeted support for course categories and expected outcomes
• Improve our alignment understanding for formative programmatic assessment
• Refine summative processes and reporting for program accreditation